Online auction apparently set up incorrectly

Donald Trump

Quick question,


I bid in an online auction a week or so for an item. Irish based auction and Irish based seller/auctioneer and (I think) Irish based site. It had a ".ie" extension at least. Wasn't a mainstream one like ebay though! I reckon it was something someone set up to try to sell it as a service for certain kinds of auctions.


I was the only bidder for one item and I received an automated email at the end of the allotted time informing me I had won and I needed to pay etc.



About an hour later the auctioneer contacted to say that nobody had won and said he did not have the authority to sell the item for that price. I also received a second email telling me that I had not won the item


I would have assumed that being the winning bidder and getting the "congratulations" email would have been the same as a hammer falling in an auction room. If I was the winning bidder when the hammer fell, I know I wouldn't get away with saying "I didn't mean to, I don't have the authority to buy it"


Anyone know of any general cases or laws that I could research into this? Not looking for specific advice on the specific case. It's as much of a curiosity as anything. I'm not that bothered. Just seems a little one sided that a seller/auctioneer could cancel without repercussion. I wouldn't mind know whether it was something I could or could not contest if it had been something I was actually bothered about!

Peregrinus

I would have thought, yeah, on first principles you have a strong case. The seller, through an agent, solicited offers. You made an offer. The seller's agent accepted that offer. Looks to me like a concluded contract. You can seek specific performance, if you really want the item, or you can look for damages for breach.

Of course, this might be overridden by any terms and conditions that you accepted when you signed up/registered with the auction site, which is presumably something you had to do in order to be able to bid in the first place. So you'd need to look into that.

micks_address

Peregrinus wrote: »

I would have thought, yeah, on first principles you have a strong case. The seller, through an agent, solicited offers. You made an offer. The seller's agent accepted that offer. Looks to me like a concluded contract. You can seek specific performance, if you really want the item, or you can look for damages for breach.

Of course, this might be overridden by any terms and conditions that you accepted when you signed up/registered with the auction site, which is presumably something you had to do in order to be able to bid in the first place. So you'd need to look into that.

I'd have thought if there's a reserve price on an item and the item doesn't make the reserve they don't have to sell. That said they shouldn't have sent you a congratulations email you've purchased something.. always fine print though.. think of all those online misprices that happen that are rarely honoured

Peregrinus

micks_address wrote: »

I'd have thought if there's a reserve price on an item and the item doesn't make the reserve they don't have to sell. That said they shouldn't have sent you a congratulations email you've purchased something.. always fine print though.. think of all those online misprices that happen that are rarely honoured

If there's a reserve they need to disclose the fact. And, reserve or not, online misprice or not, once they have sent you an email accepting your offer I think on general principles of contract law you have a concluded contract right there. The only way out of that would be to point to something in terms and conditions which the buyer has previously accepted which allows the seller or the auction/sale site to withdraw from a contract in circumstances which have happened.

Del2005

Donald Trump wrote: »

Quick question,


I bid in an online auction a week or so for an item. Irish based auction and Irish based seller/auctioneer and (I think) Irish based site. It had a ".ie" extension at least. Wasn't a mainstream one like ebay though! I reckon it was something someone set up to try to sell it as a service for certain kinds of auctions.


I was the only bidder for one item and I received an automated email at the end of the allotted time informing me I had won and I needed to pay etc.



About an hour later the auctioneer contacted to say that nobody had won and said he did not have the authority to sell the item for that price. I also received a second email telling me that I had not won the item


I would have assumed that being the winning bidder and getting the "congratulations" email would have been the same as a hammer falling in an auction room. If I was the winning bidder when the hammer fell, I know I wouldn't get away with saying "I didn't mean to, I don't have the authority to buy it"


Anyone know of any general cases or laws that I could research into this? Not looking for specific advice on the specific case. It's as much of a curiosity as anything. I'm not that bothered. Just seems a little one sided that a seller/auctioneer could cancel without repercussion. I wouldn't mind know whether it was something I could or could not contest if it had been something I was actually bothered about!

It's easy to get a .ie domain. I've often gone to a .ie website and changed it to a .co.uk or .com and got better value. You should be checking the "contact us" section to see where the company is based.

Donald Trump

Del2005 wrote: »

It's easy to get a .ie domain. I've often gone to a .ie website and changed it to a .co.uk or .com and got better value. You should be checking the "contact us" section to see where the company is based.

Regardless of the specific case I outlined, who is hypothetically responsible in such a scenario? I don't mean who caused the problem, I mean who would be "facing" me - (1)Seller (2)Agent/Auctioneer or (3)website Like if you buy a faulty item in a shop - your "contract" is with the shop not the manufacturer. If I kicked up I reckon that 3 would blame 2, 2 would blame 3 and 1 would blame either, or both 2 & 3!





I don't recall all the terms and conditions - I think the only tenuously relevant one saying that all bids must be accepted by the agent....but I would have thought that sending the "congratulations" email was effectively acceptance even if it was sent automatically and by mistake

Donald Trump

Peregrinus wrote: »

If there's a reserve they need to disclose the fact. And, reserve or not, online misprice or not, once they have sent you an email accepting your offer I think on general principles of contract law you have a concluded contract right there. The only way out of that would be to point to something in terms and conditions which the buyer has previously accepted which allows the seller or the auction/sale site to withdraw from a contract in circumstances which have happened.

Do you need to disclose that there is a reserve? Is it not implicit for an auction? In a live auction the item is usually explicitly put "on the market" at some stage.



I reckon myself that they just set it up incorrectly. There was an "AMV" which was the starting bid. I would guess there was also a field at the back end of the system where you put in the actual reserve and maybe the agent incorrectly put the starting bid value in there too. So that the system generated the automatic email.


If I were to complain or try to take action, would there be there a timeline in which to do that? Would it be 6 months? a year, 5 years?

Peregrinus

Donald Trump wrote: »

Do you need to disclose that there is a reserve? Is it not implicit for an auction?

It's not implicit. Many auctions are conducted without reserve.

But, yeah, you can have an undisclosed reserve. I'm wrong in saying that you must disclose it. I think it's probably closer to the truth to say that it would be wise to disclose it if you think that, later on, you might be pointing to it to attempt to weasel out of a contract that you appear to have formed.

Whether there was a reserve here is, strictly speaking, irrelevant. If there was a reserve, and if the highest bid was less than the reserve, the highest bid should not have been accepted. Sending an e-mail acknowledging the bid and confirming the sale indicates either that there was no reserve or, if there was, the bid exceeded it.

Donald Trump wrote: »

I reckon myself that they just set it up incorrectly. There was an "AMV" which was the starting bid. I would guess there was also a field at the back end of the system where you put in the actual reserve and maybe the agent incorrectly put the starting bid value in there too. So that the system generated the automatic email.

If I were to complain or try to take action, would there be there a timeline in which to do that? Would it be 6 months? a year, 5 years?

Take action immediately. Why would you wait? As a practical matter, if what you want is the item that you bid on, the sooner you kick up a fuss the greater the likelihood of getting it before they sell it to someone else, or dispose of it otherwise.

Legally speaking, there will be a limitation period during which you have to begin your proceedings. As we don't know where the seller is based we don't know what limitation period the local law might provide, so we don't know when your "last chance" is. But it doesn't really matter; for practical reasons, you shouldn't wait until the limitation period is about to expire; if you have any interest in following this up you should immediately demand that they sell the itme to you for the agreed price, or agree to compensate you for any additional cost you incur in buying an equivalent item elsewhere.

Donald Trump

Peregrinus wrote: »

Take action immediately. Why would you wait? As a practical matter, if what you want is the item that you bid on, the sooner you kick up a fuss the greater the likelihood of getting it before they sell it to someone else, or dispose of it otherwise.

Legally speaking, there will be a limitation period during which you have to begin your proceedings. As we don't know where the seller is based we don't know what limitation period the local law might provide, so we don't know when your "last chance" is. But it doesn't really matter; for practical reasons, you shouldn't wait until the limitation period is about to expire; if you have any interest in following this up you should immediately demand that they sell the itme to you for the agreed price, or agree to compensate you for any additional cost you incur in buying an equivalent item elsewhere.

The only reason I'd wait would be potentially to see whether seller would change their mind and let it go when nobody else is interested in item. There would be less hassle if they just came to their senses. And I don't know how bothered or motivated I would be to pursue. It might depend on their behaviour



Seller is Irish based. I know who the seller is.