Do you give first to respond "rights"?

[SuperSprint]

You just need an offer, an acceptance, and consideration. The offer is the orignal post. Acceptance occurs,at the latest, when the message is received in the sellers inbox (not when it's read.) The consideration is the exchange of promises. Giving some sort of minimal monetary consideration ($1.00 to secure a purchase contract on a gun, for instance) is really just an ancient relic of outmoded law. Modern case law makes it clear that the exchange of the promise to sell and the promise pay is adequate consideration. So, you have a binding contract, just no damages from the breach in most cases.

Good point, but unless the buyer pays the agreed amount he/she has failed to meet the conditions precedent in the contract. At that point, BOTH parties are in breach of contract and any attempt to have it adjudicated is moot.

Pointless, but entertaining....

 

[JamBurglar]

Legally, you could also claim you never saw the p.m., even if they could prove that you got it, you could claim you didn't read it.

Failure to act cannot create a binding contract, btw. Also it's not true that if you offer something for sale, and somebody offers to buy it, that creates a contract. It does no such thing. Sellers reserve the right, legally, to sell to anybody they want. Also an individual can even go so far as to discriminate against someone for any reason! You can say you don't want to sell it to somebody because they're hispanic, or something equally as screwed up, and get away with it.

There's certain laws that limit that, like in real estate transactions, but most laws about things like that only apply to business with several employees. Someone selling something privately can sell it to whomever they want for whatever messed up reason they want.

Well, you seem to know a lot about the law. Show me a caselaw study where a guy sold an arcade game pcb to somebody, discriminated against another buyer, and was convicted in court over it.

Some shit is just common sense interpretation.

If that was solid logic then I could say, "show me a case where a guy sold an arcade game pcb to somebody, discriminated against another buyer, and wasn't convicted." The law doesn't work like that. Facts fit into certain legal frameworks and then those frameworks are applied to the facts to give a (hopefully) consistent result.

Common sense can be a good guide, but in this case I think your common sense is fundamentally at odds with contract law.

Acceptance (via mail or e-mail) typically occurs upon delivery, not when you read it. With the mail, there's even a "posting rule" which says acceptance happens when you mail it. I won't get into all the logic behind this but it has to do with being able to resolve "he said she said scenarios". Invariably someone lies about when they got it, or whether they read it or whathaveyou and the law has wisened up to shit like that. With PMs it's not hard to discern delivery because it's seconds after the PM is sent. Judges are smart too. If you said some shit like "well I got it, but I didn't read it" or "I got it, but there's no way to prove I read it" then you'd be toast. You'd also be exposing yourself to felony perjury charges, so you've gone from civil liability for breach of contract to potentially losing voting rights. So always tell the truth. Also, you should never use the phrase "get away with it" when dealing with the Court system.

Okay, also, failure to act can create a binding contract. But instead of diving down that hypothetical rabbit hole let's deal with the facts. By offering something for sale, you HAVE acted. You've made an offer. The question then arises: what sort of offer have you made?

You CAN reserve rights in an offer. BUT, you can only reserve rights by actually reserving them. Like, if you say "I'll sell this PCB for $50.00, but I reserve the right to sell it to the purchaser of my choosing, or not to sell it all". That sets up a limited offer, and it's really more of a request for offers by purchasers than an offer on your behalf. If you just say "I'll sell this PCB for $50.00" that reserves nothing. That's an unqualified offer. If a buyer says "I accept" you have a contract. If he's willing and able to pay and you fail to sell, you've breached. You can't get cute and say "I'm not selling to you" and then when he doesn't pay say "well, we've both breached". The law will look at the first breach only, (for obvious reasons.) Now, if there was some well accepted custom in the arcade parts realm that there is always a reservation of rights in all sales then that custom might work to create a rule, but I doubt you'd get enough consensus to create that sort of customary rule here. So, in sum, you have to actually communicate to people what your intents are to fully protect yourself. And that's a good thing anyway because it prevents customers from being pissed about something that could be prevented.

Race discrimination opens up a whole new can of worms. The only advice I can give you (disclaimer, no I'm not giving you legal advice, just common sense advice) is (1) remember that you're dealing in interstate commerce and (2) racism is just plain wrong.

Again, all of this is completely and totally overblown since these rules apply to multi-million dollar transactions the same way that they do to $50 transactions. They only usually matter in large transactions because hey, it's just not worth it for $50

 

[SuperSprint]

You can't get cute and say "I'm not selling to you" and then when he doesn't pay say "well, we've both breached". The law will look at the first breach only, (for obvious reasons.)

Great discussion! I assume this references my post, in which case you misunderstood my comments. I was assuming that the seller had sold to another buyer prior, with the discriminating factor being presentation of payment (as opposed to some "personal" criteria). In that case, the "first" buyer has not satisfied the conditional precedent of payment and thus the seller can fail to provide goods without a breach of contract.

Thoughts?

 

[JamBurglar]

Great discussion! I assume this references my post, in which case you misunderstood my comments. I was assuming that the seller had sold to another buyer prior, with the discriminating factor being presentation of payment (as opposed to some "personal" criteria). In that case, the "first" buyer has not satisfied the conditional precedent of payment and thus the seller can fail to provide goods without a breach of contract.

Thoughts?

Yeah, it is sort of interesting stuff from a theoretical standpoint. I think I get what you're saying.

You could set up a condition but you'd have to be explicit about it. You'd have to say something like "I'll sell this PCB for $50 however you must make payment to secure the purchase. Until you make payment I reserve the right to sell to another purchaser." The reason you have to do this sort of thing is because the mere exhange of promises is valid consideration. The seller's promise is "if a purchaser gives me $50 then I'll sell this PCB to the purchaser." The purchaser's promise is "I'll give you $50 if you send me the PCB." I know this seems insanely simple, but it's that exchange of promises that creates the consideration, and as soon you have the offer, the acceptance, and the consideration (which happens simultanious to the acceptance) you have a binding contract. Everyone is then bound until there is a breach. If you want to make payment a condtion of the contract, you'd have to say so. The real grey area is, how long does the purchaser have to pay? Custom is probably going to dictate what's reasonable. I'd say, with a paypal exchange, if you don't pay within a few days then you've breached and the seller is free to move on (there could even be damages caused by missing some sales.)

 

[ChaosJohn]

As a rule, the first person to come to my house and PAY ME gets first dibs.

I've had too many games on Craigslist where someone DEFINITELY wanted it, but "they couldn't make it until Saturday". After I turned 2 or 3 other people away, then they changed their mind, and I had to go back and relist it.

Now I generally won't hold stuff. There are two people who "couldn't make it until next weekend" for the stuff I listed last weekend. I gave them my number and told them to call me when they get back in town. One was for the pinball. I had someone come over at lunch today and check out the pin and they definitely want it. If I had held it for the "next weekend" person, they might have backed out and I might have missed the chance to sell it to this person.

I'll occasionally hold something for a week or so for a KLOV buyer who I know. They're statistically more reliable than a generic craigslist person. And there's the side advantage that they know what they're getting into with an arcade, so they're not going to call me a month later if something stops working - they'll just fix it themselves.

 

[kencinder]

Wow all this legal rhetoric flying around...

The individual is not a store, and until money has changed hands or something on paper and signed, the law anywhere will see nothing of any sort of "deal".

Even as a "store" this doesn't apply.

You can't walk into a store and say "I'll buy that, but hang onto it for me until I get paid in 2 weeks", not without signing a purchase agreement of some sort. That is if the store will even do it...which they are not obligated to do whatsoever, they aren't even obligated to sell to you.

They can tell you if you walk in with cash in hand "We're not selling to you, leave our store" and you can't do a damn thing about it.

None of what any of you have pulled out of your asses applies without some form of legally binding contract. You can't just claim an item for sale simply because you offered to purchase it first.

 

[sosage]

Wow all this legal rhetoric flying around...

The individual is not a store, and until money has changed hands or something on paper and signed, the law anywhere will see nothing of any sort of "deal".

Even as a "store" this doesn't apply.

You can't walk into a store and say "I'll buy that, but hang onto it for me until I get paid in 2 weeks", not without signing a purchase agreement of some sort. That is if the store will even do it...which they are not obligated to do whatsoever, they aren't even obligated to sell to you.

They can tell you if you walk in with cash in hand "We're not selling to you, leave our store" and you can't do a damn thing about it.

None of what any of you have pulled out of your asses applies without some form of legally binding contract. You can't just claim an item for sale simply because you offered to purchase it first.

I had first dibs on quoting this post and saying "QFT".

 

[JamBurglar]

Yeah, I don't know who's making up all these crazy laws! I've seen Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. I know what the laws are! Unless you can prove youself at Thunderdome then there are no contracts! I can just walk into a store and piss on the floor and then be like "here's an analogy that's not really analogous to what I just did but I said "legally" in there so it's the law!" Who can legally prove me wrong?

Case closed.

 

[jawhn]

michael jackson eating popcorn animated gif

 

[WadeLanham]

Definitely no commitment on my part. I just (stupidly) happened to mention that he was the first to respond (this was in the email where I told him I sold/commited it to someone else). Dumb move on my part.

Then you can sell to whoever you want. If he whines, that's all it is - whining.

Wade

 

[WadeLanham]

After reading some of the replies in here, I wonder if I am now the only one hesitant to buy from people in here. Someone is selling a part I need, and even I am the first one to reply, I could get skipped over and the item sold to the next person just because they bought from the seller before? That's total BS. I just can't believe some people will sell by a "pick and choose" method because they can "sell to whoever they damn well please." Sorry, but that's just poor business ethics and it WILL come around to bite these elite sellers in the ass. Remember, Karma's a bitch.

It's not just the "fair" thing to do, it's the RIGHT thing to do. I've been told before that my way is a poor business way, but I could care less. I like to sleep well at night knowing that I did the right thing.

Bill

This is all pretty funny. Business ethics on KLOV?? The "right" thing to do? You so funny... You haven't been burned buy KLOV buyers/sellers enough yet apparently. Otherwise you'd be ready to skip line and sell to your local buddies or trusted internet buddies...

Wade

 

[WadeLanham]

Once you have an offer and an acceptance, you have a binding crontract. Technically, if your post is worded in a way that constitutes a legal offer, and then someone e-mails you saying "I accept your offer" (or something to that effect) then you have a legally binding contract.

Technically, this is not true. You would have to respond to a buyer telling him that he's getting the item. And even then, once payment or pickup terms or whatever are specified further, the whole thing breaks down unless you both agree again. For example, I could respond to the first person to PM me with "Okay, lets specify payments terms. I'll only take cash, and you have 2 hours to pay me. Otherwise my buddy John is coming over with the cash and getting the item." Since the first person to PM probably wants to use Paypal, and I don't want to use Paypal, this deal can easily be broken.

Wade

 

[gutsman004]

If you want to be a credible seller,then do the right thing.
If you want to be a less than credible seller,then do whatever you feel like regardless of whether it's right or wrong,rude or not.

 

[pacman71]

I take a 50 dollar paypal deposit now. I basically don't give them my paypal addy until they are ready to pay.

when I get the money then the person has dibbs for a few weeks. I always take it as a gift so if they don't take the machine I keep the money. I have never kept the money because people who put a deposit down are usually the type that follow through.. in my experience.

I used to be a really nice guy about it, but now I figure my time is as valuable as theirs. The guy who comes up with the money the fastest wants it the most.

 

[tron guy]

I hear a lot of idealistic statements about how someone should or ought to handle situations. And how much better they are than other people here based on this phantom idealism.

My idealistic expectation as a seller, is that the first guy that responds says he has my money and wants to buy the item. Furthermore he has a solid reputation on here, or at least doesn't have a sketchy one. On top of that, he hasn't acted like a tool sticking up for idiots concerning situations that aren't his business. Additionally, he doesn't try to egyptian slave me down on my price. Moving on, I don't have any good friends that need the parts I have for sale.

I have always sold to the first person that wanted it, aside from situations where the first backed out. But any one of you douchebags that thinks it's unethical for me to sell to a buddy or family member even when they were 2nd in line is a complete idiot. complete.

 

[groffdaddy]

I fully understand why you would want to sell something to someone who you know and trust and not sell to a known douchebag...but just because you don't know the person does not seem fair to me...

I thought this forum was here to bring collectors together and make new contacts outside of usual circle of friends.

 

[Ripweade]

This is all pretty funny. Business ethics on KLOV?? The "right" thing to do? You so funny... You haven't been burned buy KLOV buyers/sellers enough yet apparently. Otherwise you'd be ready to skip line and sell to your local buddies or trusted internet buddies...

Wade

Thank you, thank you! I'll be here all week!

Serioulsy, though... I haven't bought or sold through here yet. The closest I got was to e-mail someone about marquees for sale, and between the prices and shipping, I skipped that one FAST. I've been in the hobby for almost 12 years now, was a somewhat regular in RGP and RGVAC but only joined Klov a few months ago. Now I'm VERY hesitant to do any deals through here.

It seems pretty cool here, but also somewhat disturbing... Lol!

Bill

 

[JamBurglar]

I hear a lot of idealistic statements about how someone should or ought to handle situations. And how much better they are than other people here based on this phantom idealism.

My idealistic expectation as a seller, is that the first guy that responds says he has my money and wants to buy the item. Furthermore he has a solid reputation on here, or at least doesn't have a sketchy one. On top of that, he hasn't acted like a tool sticking up for idiots concerning situations that aren't his business. Additionally, he doesn't try to egyptian slave me down on my price. Moving on, I don't have any good friends that need the parts I have for sale.

I have always sold to the first person that wanted it, aside from situations where the first backed out. But any one of you douchebags that thinks it's unethical for me to sell to a buddy or family member even when they were 2nd in line is a complete idiot. complete.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel about it from a practical standpoint.

 

[GameyMcGame]

But any one of you douchebags that thinks it's unethical for me to sell to a buddy or family member even when they were 2nd in line is a complete idiot. complete.

Doing the right thing can be very tough. The frustration/anger you are feeling is called cognitive dissonence.

Why wouldnt you tell your friends, family, KLOV'rs etc that your selling something first and try to hook them up with a deal?


silly goose, this problem is easy to solve!

[adding an edit to say I'm busting balls here...if you couldnt tell]

 

[JamBurglar]

Once you have an offer and an acceptance, you have a binding crontract. Technically, if your post is worded in a way that constitutes a legal offer, and then someone e-mails you saying "I accept your offer" (or something to that effect) then you have a legally binding contract.

Technically, this is not true. You would have to respond to a buyer telling him that he's getting the item. And even then, once payment or pickup terms or whatever are specified further, the whole thing breaks down unless you both agree again. For example, I could respond to the first person to PM me with "Okay, lets specify payments terms. I'll only take cash, and you have 2 hours to pay me. Otherwise my buddy John is coming over with the cash and getting the item." Since the first person to PM probably wants to use Paypal, and I don't want to use Paypal, this deal can easily be broken.

Wade

I know you guys don't really want to believe it's true, because it does seem to be absurd when you have these small transactions but I'm quoting you black letter law. I'm not just pulling rules out of the air and saying "legally" or "technically" in front of it to make it sound official.

A contract is "an agreement between two or more parties, [the] preliminary step in making of which is [an] offer by one and acceptance by other . . . upon legal considration." (Black's Law Dictionary) "Technically" we're talking about "excutory contracts": a contract that remains wholly unperformed or for which there remains something sitll to be done by both sides. (Blacks Law Dictionary).

An executory contract is a very common thing. A good example is a real estate transaction. You don't just plunk down $300,000 and walk into the house. You enter into an executory contract that is fully executed at closing. Everyone is bound by the "purchase contract". You can't back out of closing without breaching unless there are specified contingencies that are not met (like passing the home inspection). eBay is another common example of an executory contract. There is an offer to sell, contingent upon acceptance by the highest bidder within a defined time. The high bid is the acceptance and forms the executory contract. Then the payment happens and then the goods are shipped. But, once the contract is formed no one can "legally" back out without breaching the contract. Every time you do a deal on KLOV you enter into an executory contract.

Where people tend to be getting tripped up is that they want to add a bunch of contingencies to the contract like "I only want to sell to people I like," and "I need to get paid within 2 hours in gold bars." Those contingencies need to be made clear in the original offer otherwise, "legally" the purchaser has a reasonable amount of time to pay, and the seller has a reasonable amount of time to ship.

Of course, none of this works in real life with small transactions. Every post in the for sale section would need 3 pages of text to effectively reserve rights. It's just not worth it over small transactions. BUT! That doesn't mean that contract law does not apply to these transactions. The same rules apply if you're buying a piece of gum or buying the Hope Diamond.

Again, I'm not saying people are jerks for trying to protect themselves as sellers, or buyers. That's just smart. But legally, a lot of you are wrong in your assumptions about contract law. If you were involved in larger transactions I'd be concerned about your exposure.