Posted By:
DonPost above said this:
"I repectfully disagree:
The legal principle as to whether there is a binding contract is whether there was a "unilateral" mistake of fact or a "mutual" mistake of fact.
Here the seller made the mistake, not the buyer. As a "unilateral" mistake it is not voidable and is a binding contract.
With that said I would take the position that most here have: Recognize that the seller made what appears to be an innocent mistake and let it go."
------------------------------
A year or two ago, a major auction house (can't remember which one), listed a bunch of coins on ebay that were worth hundreds of dollars each, for $1 BIN's. (This was all discussed on the CU coin forum.) Their intent was to start at $1 and have a reserve at $xxx, but an incompetent employee listed them wrong.
Needless to say, they would not honor the bids. Should they have? Does it make a difference that it was an obvious error rather than the difference between $150-$250?
Also, the same auction house did the exact same thing a month later and again refused to honor the bids. Does that make a difference?
Personally, I tend to look at these issues as black and white, either you have a binding contract 100% of the time regardless of circumstances or you don't, which means the bidder can back out at any time as well. Honestly, I'm not sure which side of that fence I'd fall on though. I guess that's why these things get sorted out one at a time.