Trademe?

[oldrider]

Is it legal to sell stuff by auction on Trademe when you don't actually posses the article on sale? :shifty:

[Hitcher]

Is this a trick question or a confession?

[oldrider]

No, I bought something and now have to wait while the vendor procures the item! :confused:

[Hitcher]

No, I bought something and now have to wait while the vendor procures the item!

Hmmm. That's OK then. It's only potentially illegal.

[allycatz]

Its illegal and called 'Drop Shipping'...pm the auction to TM

[Hitcher]

Its illegal and called 'Drop Shipping'...pm the auction to TM

What's the difference between that an a bike shop that accepts payment for a bike that it's ordered or awaiting from a distributor, or for a helmet on indent?

[allycatz]

Probably not alot but its a Tm rule.....maybe its to do with it being an online auction and not a face to face transaction with an actual business...not sure but good question anyways

[Maha]

Come on John, you knew that Busty Bobby wouldn't be ready for another few weeks, yet you still bid....:shifty:

[meteor]

Criminal offence of 'Obtains by Deception'... the deception is leading the purchaser to believe you have the item for sale when the transaction is completed as opposed to being able to get the item... It used to be called False Pretences. But if it's a great deal and the seller comes through... buyers choice. There a saying "Caveat Emptor" or buyer beware... internet auctions are far from safe.

[meteor]

What's the difference between that an a bike shop that accepts payment for a bike that it's ordered?

The difference is that the purchaser enters the transaction knowing the bike is on order so there is no falsehood or deception whereas in an auction the seller is purporting to have the item in the sellers possession.

[oldrider]

Firstly I don't feel threatened but I was surprised when the seller told me there would be a delay while he got the goods from his supplier!

I was unaware of this and had no reason to think that he did not actually hold possession of the goods on offer!

Caveat Emptor accepted, I am just trying to clarify the Trademe situation.

This is the second time that that has happened, the first was when I bought my bike, I had to wait 3 months for the side boxes and the bike had been advertised as complete!

[Pedrostt500]

I would suggest that you hold payment untill the seller has the goods, in fact if you can pic up the goods , go for payment on pick up.
In that way at the worst you still keep your money.

[kwaka_crasher]

Is it legal to sell stuff by auction on Trademe when you don't actually posses the article on sale? :shifty:

It's legal but it's against their terms and conditions.

[mynameis]

Its illegal and called 'Drop Shipping'...pm the auction to TM


What's the difference between that an a bike shop that accepts payment for a bike that it's ordered or awaiting from a distributor, or for a helmet on indent?

Um that would be called Non TradeMe "Drop Shipping" :lol:

[Ixion]

What's the difference between that an a bike shop that accepts payment for a bike that it's ordered or awaiting from a distributor, or for a helmet on indent?

Bike shop, you know who you are dealing with, and where they are. Trademe, who knows. Hence, Tradme rule that you must be in possession of the article . Not always religiously observed, but inherently sensible. Too easy otherwise for a crook to put up a bunch of auctions , demand the money, fob off delivery until he's cleaned up, then disappear.

Not illegal though. Just a breach of Trademe terms, all they can do is ban him.

[Headbanger]

Meh, I bought an item through Trademe from a Bikeshop, Then was informed the item would have to be fabricated, Then was informed that the manufacturer wasn't making that line for awhile, was then informed that all production had ceased as the chrome wasn't up to standard.

Then a month later got an email demanding to know if I was going to complete the transaction. LMFAO.

Funny enough I did, But I really wanted to tell him to fuck himself.

Also, The fucktard continued to run auctions for the non-available item the entire time.

[avgas]

Probably not alot but its a Tm rule.....maybe its to do with it being an online auction and not a face to face transaction with an actual business...not sure but good question anyways
Yeah TM are a bit "back in time" with this rule. It has been common use for quite some time - and is almost business standard. The reason why TM don't like this is their 28 day completion period. You see TM don't like dealing as a middle man for a transaction for more than 28 days. Which is why TM is not a true open market - they are just middlemen.
I suspect it is the same with eBAY.
FYI normal business market usually has a 50 day transaction period.

[Coldrider]

Probably not alot but its a Tm rule.....maybe its to do with it being an online auction and not a face to face transaction with an actual business...not sure but good question anywaysDealing with a shop for supply you are actually engaging into a contract, the shop is not selling, you are offering to purchase.

[Headbanger]

FYI normal business market usually has a 50 day transaction period.

Any business that thinks they have 50 days to supply the purchased item deserves to go broke.

[Headbanger]

Dealing with a shop for supply you are actually engaging into a contract, the shop is not selling, you are offering to purchase.

Best you go read the consumer guarantees act again, By putting a purchase price on an item the "shop" is offering that item for sale.

[Ixion]

Common law, displaying the item is only an "invitation to treat". CGA makes it an offence (criminal, not civil law) to purport to be selling something without the actual intention to do so. Designed to stop "bait and switch" selling tactics.

[Quasievil]

Half the online bike shops dont hold any stock, order in as required, infact many drop ship as a natural course of business. hence two weeks supply dates.

[Coldrider]

Best you go read the consumer guarantees act again, By putting a purchase price on an item the "shop" is offering that item for sale.Bullshit, time honoured tradition of commercial law.

[Coldrider]

Half the online bike shops dont hold any stock, order in as required, infact many drop ship as a natural course of business. hence two weeks supply dates.That would be pretty stanadard business practice for online stores, 'Just In Time' inventory levels to the extreme, and that is the business model motivation.

[Headbanger]

Bullshit, time honoured tradition of commercial law.

Meh, Can't find specific reference in the CGA, so onto the fair trading act and Sales of Goods act.

[Coldrider]

Meh, Can't find specific reference in the CGA, so onto the fair trading act and Sales of Goods act.try R.D. Mulholland, Business Law Today was in 55.100 IIRC

[Headbanger]

try Mullholand

No idea what your referring to there, Can't say I really care either.

The Fair Trading Act makes numerous references to Advertising goods for supply, Hence the shop is offering to sell, Just like the the customer can offer to purchase. Either party can cease negotiations at any time. Its not a one way system where one isn't selling but the other is buying.

[Coldrider]

No idea what your referring to there, Can't say I really care either.

The Fair Trading Act makes numerous references to Advertising goods for supply, Hence the shop is offering to sell, Just like the the customer can offer to purchase. Either party can cease negotiations at any time. Its not a one way system where one isn't selling but the other is buying.Is that your best arguement?, Ixion gave you a very good clue.

[Headbanger]

Is that your best arguement?

Not having an argument, If I'm wrong then I would like to know, So far the official documentation I have read doesn't indicate this is the case.

However if you would like to better inform me then please go ahead.

[Coldrider]

Not having an argument, If I'm wrong then I would like to know, So far the official documentation I have read doesn't indicate this is the case.

However if you would like to better inform me then please go ahead.Post 20 you said I should read CGA again.
Offer and Acceptance goes back to before New Zealand was colonised.

[Headbanger]

Post 20 you said I should read CGA again.

I did indeed, and when this was rejected so eloquently I decided to follow my own advice to lower the chances I was talking out of my arse, This lead onto further acts of law in regards to trade in NZ.



Offer and Acceptance goes back to before New Zealand was colonised.

Swish, where can I read up on it?,especially in regards to trade in post-colonisation times...Like here and now.

[Coldrider]

I did indeed, and when this was rejected I decided to follow my own advice to lower the chances I was talking out of my arse, This lead onto further acts of law in regards to trade in NZ.




Swish, where can I read up on it?,especially in regards to trade in port colonisation times...Like here and now.I recieved my learning from Massey Uni 100 and 200 Commercial Law as papers in a BBS, at a cost of $400 plus text books each. Where did you get yours from?
I am sure you will be enlightened if you read the book mentioned in a previous post.

[Headbanger]

I recieved my learning from Massey Uni 100 and 200 Commercial Law as papers in a BBS, at a cost of $400 plus text books each. Where did you get yours from?
I am sure you will be enlightened if you read the book mentioned in a previous post.

Ah right, So your a bit of a dickhead. My bad for being silly enough to engage you in conversation on the topic. Still, I haven't managed to learn anything from you, That must be because your so clever.

The book you "mentioned in a previous post" was a single word with zero indication of relevance or context until you went back and edited it, what did you expect? Well, seeing as your so educated you must have deliberately kept it vague enough to be useless so you could hold onto your superiority.

That aside, I don't have access to the book, so I'll read the source, which act of law should I be reading?

[Headbanger]

Never fear, I have asked Winston for his input, He is not only educated but also intelligent and no doubt will be able to wrap it all up for me in 2 easy to read paragraphs.

[Coldrider]

Never fear, I have asked Winston for his input, He is not only educated but also intelligent and no doubt will be able to wrap it all up for me in 2 easy to read paragraphs.
Well I have just gone out to the garage to retreive my old textbooks.
Offer & Acceptance is coveredin Business Law Today, R.D.Mulholland, I have 4th edition Chapter 5 page 67 onwards.
It is not up me to be to defend your arguement based on what you think the relevant Act and your interpretation is.
CGA and FTA are codifications of the Sale of goods Act 1908, which is a codification essentially of Law Merchant.
Common Law and Custom & Practice have as much to do with the law as the Statutes.

[Headbanger]

Seeking information and clarification is not arguing, Nor is there a position to defend.

[Ixion]

..

That aside, I don't have access to the book, so I'll read the source, which act of law should I be reading?

Unfortunately, a lot of contract law is based in Common law, not statute law. So there are no acts to read. You need to study the case law. Even so significant a case as, for example, Hightrees, where Denning, J redefined the law of promissary estoppel (which says in effect that if someone says, 'Nah its sweet, don't need any payment mate' then he can't come back later and demand said payment. Sort of ) was based in Common law. And Equity. Equity isn't contained in statutes either. British Law is a strange mongrel child.

'Contract Law' by Richards is a good read.

Which leads to an interesting speculation. Koha. It's a sort of part of Maori contract law. Yes, I know that Maori contract law sort of doesn't exist. But it is an old axiom that the law never lacks a remedy . And koha is not a 'consideration' in the legal sense (well, I don't think it is anyway- in some cases it may be nearer to a charitable contribution. maybe ? or maybe not ? ) So if a case was brought that revolved around koha (" I gave them a koha for such and such and they cheated me") how would that be fitted into the Common law (or Equity for that matter). Also, koha can be given in advance - in anticipation as it were. In such a case, if a koha is given to a public official, is that bribery? I'm thinking back to 17C and 18C practice here. Pepys was unashamed about accepting gifts from his offical contacts - and I'm sure he didn't consider himself as being bribed. They were much more like koha. This could be a fascinating subject.

[Coldrider]

Seeking information and clarification is not arguing, Nor is there a position to defend.KB Rant & Rave can be educational afterall.

[Quasievil]

Sheesh boys (^*$%#

[Headbanger]

Unfortunately, a lot of contract law is based in Common law, not statute law. So there are no acts to read. You need to study the case law.

Interesting, That alone explains quite a bit.

Lmao, I can see I stepped right out of my depth very early in the piece.

Never mind, I learned a new word in the process.

codification [ˌkəʊdɪfɪˈkeɪʃən ˌkɒ-]n

1. systematic organization of methods, rules, etc.
2. (Law) Law the collection into one body of the principles of a system of law

[Ixion]

Just so. British (and thus New Zealand) law has never been codified. Edw I made a effort toward it with the Statutes of Westminster and Gloucester, but then lost interest and went off to get drunk and go whoring and fighting - motorcycles hadn't been invented then , but I think he'd have been right at home here.

Some folk think the lack of codification is a bad thing. Others, including me, think it a good thing.

[Coldrider]

Koha would fall under a 'gratuitous promise' and not be enforceable unless made in a form of a deed. (from my understanding).

[avgas]

Any business that thinks they have 50 days to supply the purchased item deserves to go broke.
Heh no they don't - that time is actually quick.
Big firms such as GE, Siemens etc give me 8+ week dropship times...........

[Ixion]

Koha would fall under a 'gratuitous promise' and not be enforceable unless made in a form of a deed. (from my understanding).


Yes, under English law. Probably. A gratuitous promise (" You're a good cunt, I'll stand you a beer next time we meet") is not actionable unless under seal. Mainly, I think, because it is a specific case of the general principle that no action can lie , save by deed, if there is no consideration given . But I think it is more complex than that - koha was/is not entriely gratuitous there is an expectation of value given and received. And the Common law has always been willing to consider importing attributes of native law. After all, that's how it originated - importing the native law of those rascally Anglo-Saxons. So I think that koha could be argued uner contract law. Possibly. As I said, a fascinating subject. I hope the churchillian gentleman comes along (and Mr HDC perhaps) - it could be quite interesting.

[Headbanger]

Heh no they don't - that time is actually quick.
Big firms such as GE, Siemens etc give me 8+ week dropship times...........

Well, If the dairy down the road think they can take 8+ weeks to give me my damn pie then the shit will hit the fan.

[Ixion]

Delivery forms part of the terms of any contract, and default may be recovered by damages - in some cases the contract may even be voidable. So if they want you to wait 8 weeks for your pie, tell them to stuff it up their arse. In such a case it would (should) be the clear expectation of both parties that delivery was immediate , and if that prove not to be the case, the deal is off.

[Coldrider]

Getting back to the Trademe problem, the enticement of the offer (Trademe listing) is made when the vendor is in full knowledege that he may not be able to complete the contract, compared to a vendor who has temporarily runout of stock.

[Ixion]

Well, I do not think he is saying that he cannot complete the contract. He is specifying that the contract is for goods for future delivery. Which is quite legal (and, as noted, quite common). But it is in breach of Trademe's trading rules. Of course if he accepts money knowing that he cannot deliver the goods at all (ie they do not exist) then that is fraud, and a criminal mater.

[Coldrider]

It's a good way to build up a client base, not.

[avgas]

Well, I do not think he is saying that he cannot complete the contract. He is specifying that the contract is for goods for future delivery. Which is quite legal (and, as noted, quite common). But it is in breach of Trademe's trading rules. Of course if he accepts money knowing that he cannot deliver the goods at all (ie they do not exist) then that is fraud, and a criminal mater.
Yeah I have to agree here. He has to as a part of the trade me process state how long it will take for a product to get to customer - if this is outside the norm (7 days?).
FYI Laptop Battery Shop in Chch are slack.......

[JimO]

i bought a new addidas hockey stick on trade me for one of my boys in the shops they are around $450 to $500 got the one on tm for $230 turned out the stick was in South Africa the guy was straight with me before i paid and we had the stick within a week any how, which wes quicker than some of the trades i have had from north island people

[Maha]

Just hog the thread for a question, saves starting another thread and having the two merged.

Anyway...
I have been offered cash for an item I have on Trademe, the cash offer is $10 below reserve.
The auction expires on Sunday, can I sell before auction ends?

PS I dont use TM that often.

[avgas]

Just hog the thread for a question, saves starting another thread and having the two merged.

Anyway...
I have been offered cash for an item I have on Trademe, the cash offer is $10 below reserve.
The auction expires on Sunday, can I sell before auction ends?

PS I dont use TM that often.
Not suppose to................................................ .. Unless you state "item offered elsewhere"

[Maha]

Not suppose to................................................ .. Unless you state "item offered elsewhere"

Really?, so if I dont accept his offer and the auction ends without reaching reserve on Sunday, I could dip out all together?

[avgas]

Really?, so if I dont accept his offer and the auction ends without reaching reserve on Sunday, I could dip out all together?
Options are this:
- Accept offer, raise reserve to a stupid figure so no one accidentally bids and sell to guy. (cost you the least)
- Decline offer, leave auction as it is.
- Change reserve to his offer and see what happens. (you stand to make most money here)
FYI you can also change the time is ends - change auction time to 2 days

[JimO]

Just hog the thread for a question, saves starting another thread and having the two merged.

Anyway...
I have been offered cash for an item I have on Trademe, the cash offer is $10 below reserve.
The auction expires on Sunday, can I sell before auction ends?

PS I dont use TM that often.

you can edit the pricing and put a buy now up

[oldrider]

Yeah I have to agree here. He has to as a part of the trade me process state how long it will take for a product to get to customer - if this is outside the norm (7 days?).......

Yes, in the case I am quoting they did state that, it was 7 to 10 days delivery!

It was after I paid him he said he was dependent upon his supplier for delivery, hence my original question!

Should vendors' be selling stuff on Trademe when they don't actually posses the goods? :confused:

[avgas]

Yes, in the case I am quoting they did state that, it was 7 to 10 days delivery!

It was after I paid him he said he was dependent upon his supplier for delivery, hence my original question!

Should vendors' be selling stuff on Trademe when they don't actually posses the goods? :confused:
As far as you are concerned. If you do not receive the product in 10 days. You have every right to jump up and down. They have to deliver in quoted time. This is regardless of drop-shipping. Just like you have to pay them in the agreed time.
Trademe - while very "modern wild west" is still a legal binding auction house. You purchase on the agreement of the Auction.