2x BMW 840CI for sale - SOLD

[Olaf 3317]

let's hope the novella was more than enough.

[M3AN 4016]

Invitation to treat + offer + acceptance = binding contract, consideration (edit: payment) is unnecessary.

The original deal was a legally binding contract if the original buyer cares that much to pursue it.

 

Edited November 10, 2019 by M3AN

[Blackie 510]

Waiting to see these pop up on trademe with a markup and 'change of circumstances'.?

[Mad_Max 231]

7 hours ago, gjm said:

 

It seems Brad had his offer overturned (too). Although until he wrote of it here, I wasn't aware of it.

Someone else I know of, a thoroughly nice member of the forum, had agreement, verbally and in writing, that he was buying the cars at the asking price. He'd asked for bank details so he could transfer a deposit to the seller, with balance to be paid on collection - this was all agreed. There was a lot of organisation going on, arranging funds for transfer, sorting transport - all the usual stuff.

Then the seller pops up and says "Sorry, I've agreed to sell to someone else who has offered more money." Not even an opportunity to increase an offer. Just nope - sold to someone else. The buyer I know of was understandably very, very disappointed. Yes - sale goes to the first person in, but once agreement has been reached (especially in writing), it's normally fair to consider yourself to be that first person.
The buyer with the higher offer is understood to have been aware that a sale was agreed. We think we know who the buyer is (we aren't sure, so will say nothing), but I suggest anonymity is unlikely to last long with cars like this.

Personally I feel that both the seller and the buyer who made the higher offer have both acted extremely poorly. I'm annoyed, and I hadn't even considered making an offer!

Agree completely with you Graham, sadly not the first time "deals" like this have been attempted on this site and someone has been shafted - it happened to me recently as well. Most disappointing when it happens for the one that missed out, and goes to show that there are ones out there that are not true to their word.

21 minutes ago, M3AN said:

Invitation to treat + offer + acceptance = binding contract, consideration (edit: payment) is unnecessary.

The original deal was a legally binding contract if the original buyer cares that much to pursue it.

Seller has got to be thankful this didn't happen overseas, where they would get sued for this sort of action, especially given the agreement was allegedly in writing as well as verbal. Reality is that people that do this sort of thing usually don't last long in public forums.

[kiwi535 538]

he could get sued here too if the protaganist decided he wanted too.As has been said above,a contract had been made.

offer and acceptance.....the proper outcome would be he gets the cars at the price he offered,and the other guy would likely be up for the costs involved in the pursuit

[Cammsport 390]

I honestly don't have faith in the system to make it worth the time. I won an auction on TM a couple years ago for a red E36 coupe with red interior. I was so stoked and had started the transport admin etc. Seller got back to me a week later and said he'd decided to sell to someone else. I made contact with small claims and TM, both said I hadn't suffered any real loss. Basically tough luck. I was gutted.

[kiwi535 538]

Thanks I guess this sithe reason people dont pursue To many stories that dont seem to back up the fabled "CONTRACT".

[eliongater 718]

I’m visiting my lawyer this morning, so I’ll ask him what he feels an appropriate course of action would be in this situation.

Edited November 11, 2019 by eliongater

[330itis 15]

Why so butt hurt? 15k is too cheap for these cars and everyone knows it. They are factory manuals. I say let the guy have it that offered more. Probably closer to the more realistic value, and a fairer price for the seller. Dont be sour because you missed out on an opportunity to rip off the seller.

[BMTHUG 1057]

Not about being butt hurt, it's about what's fair to the prospective buyer who already struck an agreement with the seller. The seller has no integrity and neither does the snake that slithered in with a higher offer. It's about having integrity and being true to your word which it seems most of you are lacking. If you advertise something for a set asking price and someone offers you your asking price, it's a bitch move to cancel a verbal agreement that has already been agreed to by both parties when offered a higher sum by an "anonymous" party. It's about maintaining your integrity and sticking to your word. I feel sorry for the fella that lost out on the vehicles because of some snake and a buyer with no integrity. He would of in no way been ripped off if his asking price had been offered because he set the price not the initial agreed buyer. Some people need to learn about integrity and being good to your word. 

[BreakMyWindow 1874]

agree, that was a real c u n t y move by the seller.

[zero 1162]

sh*t just got real

[Mad_Max 231]

21 hours ago, Cammsport said:

I honestly don't have faith in the system to make it worth the time. I won an auction on TM a couple years ago for a red E36 coupe with red interior. I was so stoked and had started the transport admin etc. Seller got back to me a week later and said he'd decided to sell to someone else. I made contact with small claims and TM, both said I hadn't suffered any real loss. Basically tough luck. I was gutted.

Yeah that's the exact problem right there, small claims/disputes tribunal never really rule on anything on the truest sense of what's "legal", but more who's out of pocket, and it's wrong. If you have entered into an agreement (especially through TardeMe) then, as the law stands. you are the one legally entitled to the goods.

9 hours ago, 330itis said:

Why so butt hurt? 15k is too cheap for these cars and everyone knows it. They are factory manuals. I say let the guy have it that offered more. Probably closer to the more realistic value, and a fairer price for the seller. Dont be sour because you missed out on an opportunity to rip off the seller.

Yeah let's see you say this when you go to buy a house, sign the contract, then the vendor/real estate agent rings you and say "bad luck, someone else offered $10k more - even though you had a contract, you're missing out". Or a dealership/car yard next time you go to upgrade cars, rings you once the contract is signed and says the same thing. Bet you won't be playing this tune in that situation.

Property sector has laws against this. So does the business sector. And every other sector. I've been involved in contract law for 15 years or so in the construction industry, and will tell you right now - you try pulling this s**t in any of those sectors, your arse is in a sling big time, you simply can't do it without copping the penalties.

At the end of the day, if what we are being told is true and accurate, and the seller had entered into written and verbal agreements with person A, then person B's offer should never have been accepted, even if it was cash on the spot, that day. it is immoral and, in so many other ways, completely illegal.

So many people around these days that have no morals/honesty/integrity left........

End rant.

[eliongater 718]

Thought I should clear the air a bit...

I'm the original buyer that @gjm and @Olaf have alluded to. I have taken legal advice and am considering legal action. I'd prefer not to discuss the details on an open forum at this stage. Any advice directed at me please PM me.

Feel free to continue expressing your want to live vicariously through a project thread though.

Edited November 12, 2019 by eliongater

[Mad_Max 231]

I'm sorry to hear that, you've always been an upstanding member on this forum as long as I've been a member.

Agreed completely with your last sentence, I think a lot are just venting at how they'd feel if this happened to them, public forums like this shouldn't need to turn into witch hunts, p**sing contests and slanging matches from people hidden behind screens.

I wish you luck and hope you get some answers on the legal front, whatever they may be.

[gjm 3258]

On 11/12/2019 at 7:55 PM, Mad_Max said:

At the end of the day, if what we are being told is true and accurate, and the seller had entered into written and verbal agreements with person A, then person B's offer should never have been accepted, even if it was cash on the spot, that day. it is immoral and, in so many other ways, completely illegal.

So many people around these days that have no morals/honesty/integrity left........

I was wondering how far this could go. 

Generically, and assuming Person A has an upheld case for breach of contract, could Person B find themselves in a position where they are (effectively) in possession of stolen goods? 

[Olaf 3317]

Come on boys and girls, I think this has gone about as far as it needs to here.  

• An indeterminate number of people are feeling aggrieved, and are taking legal advice on the matter.  
• Views have been cast here. 
• The seller has presumably pocketed some money and has a couple of his late father's cars off of the family lawn.

We're a broad community; the purchaser is probably amongst us as well.  

Can we move on, or do some of you want to keep picking at the scab?

[M3AN 4016]

4 hours ago, gjm said:

I was wondering how far this could go. 

Generically, and assuming Person A has an upheld case for breach of contract, could Person B find themselves in a position where they are (effectively) in possession of stolen goods? 

No... the relief for breach of contract is rarely the reinstatement and execution of said contract. Rather, the aggrieved party might be compensated for actual losses which, in this case, is likely to be negligible. Now, if the original buyer had gone out and purchased a couple of 850 engines on the belief s/he was going to receive the cars for said price then that would be a different matter and a different case. Any magistrate would also be interested in how fair the (original) buyer thought the price was, if they knew they were getting a killer deal that would not be considered favourably.

Essentially in the law's eyes this is probably about haste, naivety, mistakes, opportunism and possibly a little greed, nobody has suffered any serious loss and the law would look at the circumstances, not the morality.

I suspect that if the seller had approached the original buyer and said "hey look, I've just got this better offer and it looks like I priced them wrong from the outset, could we negotiate?" the outcome might be the same but the parties would all feel better about it. I think that's the lesson here.

 

[gjm 3258]

Fair enough. And - agreed. ?