Quote:
Originally Posted by travrosty
You fail to realize that lelands could make good on the item after 3 years if it wants to, the wording does not prohibit them from doing so. What it does is allow Leland's to take on each item after 3 years on a case by case basis because all items are different. They are trying to avoid a rigid policy that is the same for all items when all items aren't the same and they want some flexibility in dealing with a return depending on the item, who is claiming in-authenticity and what proof they might have.
But it's their policy and people can bid or not bid based on that.
Even if they didn't have the 3 year limitation, they don't spell out what would constitute 'proof' of a refund anyway, so just like anyone else, they reserve the right to determine authenticity by their own standards during ANY time period after the item is sold, just as they state.
|
No, I fully realize that, but I am not interested in what someone
might do voluntarily if the spirit moves them, I am interested in what they promise to do as part of their contract of sale. If the promise can be enforced for three years then it is a three year promise, not a lifetime guarantee, but if the party warranting the quality of the item is entitled to decide in its
absolute discretion whether to accept a timely claim then the warranty is what we lawyers call an illusory promise; sounds good but in reality is: "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Personally, I would rather get a conclusive "not our responsibility" statement like REA makes, because at least it leaves no illusions:
"Robert Edward Auctions, LLC utilizes a third-party authentication process for bats, jerseys, gloves, many cards, and all autographed items. In placing a bid on such items, the encapsulation, documentation and/or letters supporting the opinion of authenticity that are noted in the description are explicitly deemed acceptable to the bidder. There will always be experts that will have differing opinions. In many cases more than one authentication service has reviewed a given item. As has always been the case at REA, in all cases where the retained authenticators were not in unanimous agreement regarding authenticity, those items were not accepted for auction. This is a strict policy which REA pioneered in 1996. If the opinion of the expert(s), or the documentation supporting the authenticity of a given item, is not accepted as sufficient for a bidder, it is the bidder’s responsibility to have an expert of his or her choice examine the given item for authenticity before bidding. Robert Edward Auctions will cooperate in any reasonable manner to have any lot examined by any qualified bidder’s expert(s) of choice. Auctioneer does not warrant authenticity of any material that is accompanied by a Certificate of Authenticity, or its equivalent, from an independent third-party authentication provider. The bidder shall solely rely upon the warranties of the authentication provider issuing the Certificate or opinion, or on the warranties of the authentication provider of the bidder’s choice."