Anyone know anything about the two LS-6 CVs at BJ

[csx289]

My point was that the full responsibility of deciding if a car is real or not depends on the BIDDER. A previous post asked if BJ was posting VIN's, which if they did to some that may appear as if the auction house researched the car when in fact they did not (nor have any reason or obligation to.)

I agree with Charley, I have seen time and time again BJ stand up for bidders and help make things right when a car is misrepresented or fraudulent. However, it is NOT their (or any auction company's) job to do so. For example, a dishonest consignor brings his bogus LS6 convert to BJ, and lists it as having a build sheet, POP, and window sticker. Let's say Les inspects the car, the numbers are all correct, and the paper looks real. The next day Les overhears somebody bragging about how great their paperwork looked and how somebody got screwed on that LS6 convert. Did the consignor deliver a Chevelle with an LS6 engine and paperwork? Yes. Was the car card worded carefully and the car built to defraud somebody? Yes. But how can BJ legally protect the bidder? They can't.

Look at the 1 of None 68 Z/28 convert clone Wagonman built. Think his is the only car with perfect stampings and spot on "real" paperwork? Ha! Guess again.

My point: Don't buy a car at ANY auction or from ANY private seller or dealer without being damn sure you know what you are getting. BJ worded their agreement as such I felt it was perfect for anybody considering buying a car to read. Heck, print it out and carry it in your wallet.

Remember, it is a jungle out their and the only person who's job it is to make sure they are getting "live" and not "Memorex" is the buyer. Period.

Colin

[bashton]

[ QUOTE ]
My point was that the full responsibility of deciding if a car is real or not depends on the BIDDER. A previous post asked if BJ was posting VIN's, which if they did to some that may appear as if the auction house researched the car when in fact they did not (nor have any reason or obligation to.)

I agree with Charley, I have seen time and time again BJ stand up for bidders and help make things right when a car is misrepresented or fraudulent. However, it is NOT their (or any auction company's) job to do so. For example, a dishonest consignor brings his bogus LS6 convert to BJ, and lists it as having a build sheet, POP, and window sticker. Let's say Les inspects the car, the numbers are all correct, and the paper looks real. The next day Les overhears somebody bragging about how great their paperwork looked and how somebody got screwed on that LS6 convert. Did the consignor deliver a Chevelle with an LS6 engine and paperwork? Yes. Was the car card worded carefully and the car built to defraud somebody? Yes. But how can BJ legally protect the bidder? They can't.

Look at the 1 of None 68 Z/28 convert clone Wagonman built. Think his is the only car with perfect stampings and spot on "real" paperwork? Ha! Guess again.

My point: Don't buy a car at ANY auction or from ANY private seller or dealer without being damn sure you know what you are getting. BJ worded their agreement as such I felt it was perfect for anybody considering buying a car to read. Heck, print it out and carry it in your wallet.

Remember, it is a jungle out their and the only person who's job it is to make sure they are getting "live" and not "Memorex" is the buyer. Period.

Colin

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said! You should write a book or something.

BA

[csx289]

If only I had a venue in the Chicago area to do book signings at I would!

[Les Quam]

My post wasn't intended to imply BJ doesn't stand behind the cars that run through their auctions but rather to illustrate that contractually it is purely a discretionary gesture on their part.

The scenario Colin presented is the doomsday scenario for any muscle car buyer. Whether the seller is a dealer, private or auction house is irrelevant. A car looks on its face to be prefectly legitimate. It has all the proper docs, date codes and stamps. However someone not a party to the transaction invariably comes forward and claims to have "inside" negative information regarding the car. In this situation absent any actual verifiable evidence I don't believe any good faith seller or consignor is under any obligation legally or ethically to do anything?

However in my humble opinion a seller or consignor who is informed by the buyer with verifiable and objective evidence of fraud such as PHS docs for example or a marti report that clearly shows the car is not what it is represented to be should take some immediate action to resolve the issue. In the case of an auction house consignor I think if the money has not been disbursed to the seller it should immediately refund the purchase money to the buyer and have the seller take the car back. If the seller has been paid already I think the auction house should send out a demand letter asking for the money back and demand the seller take the car back. This would be a form of assisting the buyer and standing behind the car as much as possible. I really think that is all they can do in the situation where the money is gone?

Where I have an issue with auctions is with phantom bidders for one and secondly where a car is clearly proven to be misrepresented and the auction house tells the buyer to pound sand.

The grey area is always what constitutes reliable evidence of fraud or misrepresentation and also whether the current seller knew or should have known of the problems. Many a seller has know idea what they bought is a clone when they run it through the auction or sell it privately.