Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 76127	2007-01-22 00:32:00	Do I have a leg to stand on?	george12 (7)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
518165	2007-01-22 02:43:00	I agree with Greg. Under the terms of the CGA re auctions he doesn't have a leg to stand on technically Morally though- it's sounds slightly dodgey that the staff 'checked 2 of the computers out of 8' and they were the ones with the better specs, what are the chances that they just happened to pick those two comps? I certainly would be asking for the auctioneer's premium to be taken off as they made the 'mistake'. Maybe point out politely to the boss that you are unlikely to make any money out of them... and oh- don't fall for that "He's just stepped out of the office" crap when he told you to call back at 5pm... he's avoiding you.	Shortcircuit (1666)
518166	2007-01-22 02:49:00	Tell them you are lodging a claim, and will sue them for a refund. Plus a bit more for your trouble. It might work. If goods were not as advertised you are entitled to a refund. Their conditions can not overrule the law.	JJJJJ (528)
518167	2007-01-22 02:59:00	Oh dear, a lot of top off head comments, from those who haven't read the terms and conditions, or what the law states governing auctions :) I cant quote the whole lot, but pin back yer lug 'oles and listen, or rather read.... I shall say this only once.......... "No express or implied warranties are given as to the condition, mileage or description of the vehicle/goods notwithstanding any description in any published catalogue or advertisement." and so on It is just a fact of life that at auctions like Turners, you win some and lose some. It is easy to bid on the wrong lot number, or think you are bidding for something different to actuality, or to find you have bought a lemon. As Chris Schroder has said in the past, it's only money :)	Terry Porritt (14)
518168	2007-01-22 03:17:00	Oh dear, a lot of top off head comments, from those who haven't read the terms and conditions, or what the law states governing auctions :) I cant quote the whole lot, but pin back yer lug 'oles and listen, or rather read.... I shall say this only once.......... "No express or implied warranties are given as to the condition, mileage or description of the vehicle/goods notwithstanding any description in any published catalogue or advertisement." and so on Although I have had a few people tell me that saying that doesn't get them out of being responsible for what they say things are, for a similar reason that "Warranty void if seal is broken" isn't legally binding. I don't know what the truth is here, but I'm going to assume that Terry is correct, as he is obviously experienced in these matters. It is easy to bid on the wrong lot number, or think you are bidding for something different to actuality, or to find you have bought a lemon. That's not really relevant, none of those cases would give me the feeling that Turners was at fault, if it didn't work and I hadn't checked it, too bad for me. If I bid on the wrong lot, too bad for me. From a moral standpoint, being told that something is significantly ($60-70 each) better than they really are is not my fault, although I should have still checked. As Chris Schroder has said in the past, it's only money :) A great reason for him to give me some.	george12 (7)
518169	2007-01-22 05:02:00	There have been many many times at Turners when bidders have corrected the auctioneer over either the catalogue description or the auctioneers description of the lots on offer. When the errors have been pointed out, the auctioneer has amended his description, and the bidding has proceeded on that amendment. I have done it myself several times in the past, and so have many of the 'regulars'. You must remember they are not computer experts. They used to have one of the local computer firms to advise them, a few years ago, which was quite unethical in many a view, because that firm also used to put items (of dubious nature) in the auction, and they also used to bid, thus getting an unfair advantage, but that is besides the point currently at issue. Turners do the best they can to check that the catalogue is correct as they can get it. It still comes back to the bidder verifying for themselves what the lot number actually consists of, as it says in their terms and conditions. If you are going to bid on a monitor(s) then test them out, same with computers, take boot disks and boot CDs with you. I must admit, the present set up is not as good for testing as it used to be in the other building, or when they were located just off the Esplanade, but there is a power point there, and there is an extension lead. There are always heaps of power cords around. It must have been that nobody actually tested them out this time. I went to view a day or two before, but did not attend this auction. All I can advise is to talk as sweetly as possible to Chris Schroder and maybe he will do something for you. When the bulging capacitor Netvista saga came up, arrangements were made with some of the regular dealers who got caught out. I had a refund once on a printer that I'd mistakenly made an enormous absentee bid on. Infact they offered me the refund almost unasked because they knew I wouldn't have made the bid if in sound mind :)	Terry Porritt (14)
518170	2007-01-22 05:09:00	You must remember they are not computer experts. They used to have one of the local computer firms to advise them, a few years ago, which was quite unethical in many a view, because that firm also used to put items (of dubious nature) in the auction, and they also used to bid, thus getting an unfair advantage, but that is besides the point currently at issue. Turners do the best they can to check that the catalogue is correct as they can get it. They probably shouldn't be selling something that they aren't able to give an accurate description on. If the description is clearly in correct, then under the fair trading act, they could be pulled up on it, and they aren't allowed to create conditions that contract out of the fair trading act. Maybe they should actually employ a professional company to look over the items, to provide the descriptions. Obviously the reason why they are using a budget company, is because they don't want to pay to give a proper description. It sounds like the company they were using was very unprofessional. It still comes back to the bidder verifying for themselves what the lot number actually consists of, as it says in their terms and conditions. If you are going to bid on a monitor(s) then test them out, same with computers, take boot disks and boot CDs with you. I must admit, the present set up is not as good for testing as it used to be in the other building, or when they were located just off the Esplanade, but there is a power point there, and there is an extension lead. There are always heaps of power cords around. It must have been that nobody actually tested them out this time. I went to view a day or two before, but did not attend this auction. All I can advise is to talk as sweetly as possible to Chris Schroder and maybe he will do something for you. When the bulging capacitor Netvista saga came up, arrangements were made with some of the regular dealers who got caught out. I had a refund once on a printer that I'd mistakenly made an enormous absentee bid on. Infact they offered me the refund almost unasked because they knew I wouldn't have made the bid if in sound mind :)	rogerp (6864)
518171	2007-01-22 05:55:00	I just wish people would read a bit more carefully. I didn't say they are using a company to advise them, I said they used to a few years ago. That was just an aside, and obviously has confused the issue for some. Fair Trading Act has nothing to do with this issue. I repeat, the act of bidding says that the bidder has satisfied himself as to the condition and description of the goods. If someone does not like their terms then dont go and bid.	Terry Porritt (14)
518172	2007-01-22 06:10:00	I was wrong about The Fair Trading Act. "But it's not all bad news. Auctioneers are covered by the Fair Trading Act. That means they can't say or do anything that misrepresents or misleads you about the goods on sale or the auction process." www.consumer.org.nz	Terry Porritt (14)
518173	2007-01-22 06:12:00	I don't know how you manage to stay so calm at all these people repeating each other, Terry :p	roddy_boy (4115)
518174	2007-01-22 06:19:00	Fair Trading Act has nothing to do with this issue . I repeat, the act of bidding says that the bidder has satisfied himself as to the condition and description of the goods . If someone does not like their terms then dont go and bid . I absolutely disagree with you Terry, auctioneers have their 'reputations' to consider . . . it's not enough to say "buyer beware" just because you're holding yourself out to be a canny operator . The majority of people would accept a professional auctioneer saying that they had checked two of the computers and listed the other six on that basis and there would be no reason for the bidder to believe otherwise if the comps came from the same source and all outwardly looked the same . In other words, the claim is likely to stand up in Small Claims court . . . I speak from experience as an 'expert witness' in the past . Now . . . on to real estate agents :D	Shortcircuit (1666)
1 2 3 4 5