SUBJECT: BEWARE Steve Verkman, Keith Vari, Leland’s, Clean Sweep & Paragon auctions

[sflayank]

the way it reads and the response sounds like the op would end up with $720 not $1120
if 1120 hes doing great if 720 hes being robbed
the op would not be complaining if hes getting 1120 on 1000

[Jewish-collector]

So, if it sells for $100,000 how much does he get ?

[bbcard1]

Originally Posted by sflayank

the way it reads and the response sounds like the op would end up with $720 not $1120
if 1120 hes doing great if 720 hes being robbed
the op would not be complaining if hes getting 1120 on 1000

I think he was being proposed was not well explained or else not well understood.

[gunboat82]

The contract is not very detailed, so I can understand the consignor's confusion. In the first column, under "Schedule A: The Property > Description," it just says:

MASS CONSIGNMENT BETWEEN LELANDS/CLEAN SWEEP AUCTIONS
60% CONSIGNOR 40% AUCTION HOUSE
CASH ADVANCE $15,000
NO ADDITIONAL FEES
60/40 SPLIT [illegible] AUTH.

In the second column, under "Seller Reserve," it just says what appears to be:

60/40 SPLIT
40% LELANDS

[G1911]

Now it makes sense why the rebuttal was incredibly vague about how the OP is untrue and the only specific was about a phone call and not the contract.

The contract sure seems to give the cosigner only 60%. I don't see the BP mentioned at all, but maybe that relates to the sellers reserve column. I don't know why, but I expected a vaguely professional real contract for a six figure plus deal. OP's claims seem to be on the main points factually correct.

Hard to see 60% (possibly even lower in reality with the vague or non-existent BP references in this 'contract') being fair and reasonable. If they did indeed cherry pick only the good items as OP said, and thus are not doing a ton of work with low value stuff to get rid of, OP has been bent over.

[daves_resale_shop]

Originally Posted by G1911

Now it makes sense why the rebuttal was incredibly vague about how the OP is untrue and the only specific was about a phone call and not the contract.

The contract sure seems to give the cosigner only 60%. I don't see the BP mentioned at all, but maybe that relates to the sellers reserve column. I don't know why, but I expected a vaguely professional real contract for a six figure plus deal. OP's claims seem to be on the main points factually correct.

Hard to see 60% (possibly even lower in reality with the vague or non-existent BP references in this 'contract') being fair and reasonable. If they did indeed cherry pick only the good items as OP said, and thus are not doing a ton of work with low value stuff to get rid of, OP has been bent over.

Also stated that the cost of authentication will be shared with the consignor… important to note is that not everything was taken and the collection was cherry picked… seems like a pretty hefty consignment fee to pay for only the good stuff.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Also stated that the cost of authentication will be shared with the consignor… important to note is that not everything was taken and the collection was cherry picked… seems like a pretty hefty consignment fee to pay for only the good stuff.

Maybe cherry picked because it would not all fit on the two trucks and auctioning the better valued items first would be a great help to the consignor who was looking for cash. Sure, the auction house benefits as well but since a $15K advance was given in good faith, they would certainly want to recoup that as quickly as possible. Any business would want to do that.

Obviously, just a guess but the consignor did not state that they were not eventually taking all they committed to, just that they cherry picked on the initial load.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by rand1com

Sure, the auction house benefits as well but since a $15K advance was given in good faith, they would certainly want to recoup that as quickly as possible. Any business would want to do that.

I'd agree if it weren't for the 16% interest rate.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Also stated that the cost of authentication will be shared with the consignor… important to note is that not everything was taken and the collection was cherry picked… seems like a pretty hefty consignment fee to pay for only the good stuff.

It's still pretty unclear exactly what was taken. The OP said not everything was taken and the collection was cherry picked, but he never really said how much was taken or how much of the 2 trucks that showed up were filled. There's a lot of unknowns still, and the OP hasn't bothered to come back and answer any of the questions or provide any more information about exactly what was taken.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by jayshum

the OP hasn't bothered to come back and answer any of the questions or provide any more information about exactly what was taken.

Maybe the OP can't find the thread.

Also, not clear why the OP felt so pressured to enter into this agreement w/o taking the time to "shop" his collection around to other AH. In the scheme of things, what would a few more days be...does not appear any of his products have even been sold yet, two plus months later.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Also stated that the cost of authentication will be shared with the consignor… important to note is that not everything was taken and the collection was cherry picked… seems like a pretty hefty consignment fee to pay for only the good stuff.

I think the contract indicates authentication would be on their dime with the "No additional fees", but this contract is so... poorly written that its difficult to be certain of much.





The OP proved some of his claims by producing the contract, but other claims by him and his surrogates need to be proven, like this cherry picking claim and the 16% interest bill. IF these are true, they are easy to actually prove - there is an inventory list and there is a bill which can be produced to prove. The OP made a poor decision to sign a contract of what appears to be of his own free will at the time, and was wrong about the BP split (that part is understandable, seeing this vague contract and its unprofessional back of the napkin phrasing).

The other side has responded only with a vague statement that specifically only denies the BP split (on which they appear to be correct from the odd contract), delivered via a proxy who then moved the thread to the watercooler to lessen visibility and then made a provably false claim that a history of doing this with things that might end up not reflecting well on Lelands is' made up crap'. Unusual response if there is nothing to see here, but the burden of proof rests on he who makes the claim. IF the collection was cherry picked for only the high value items, then 60/40 is absurd and IF he is getting billed for ridiculous 16% interest rates with a contract that mentions no interest rates at all, then Lelands is horribly in the wrong, but that's not proven. OP has shown evidence for half the claims, but should prove the other half or they do not have much of any validity.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I think the contract indicates authentication would be on their dime with the "No additional fees", but this contract is so... poorly written that its difficult to be certain of much.





The OP proved some of his claims by producing the contract, but other claims by him and his surrogates need to be proven, like this cherry picking claim and the 16% interest bill. IF these are true, they are easy to actually prove - there is an inventory list and there is a bill which can be produced to prove. The OP made a poor decision to sign a contract of what appears to be of his own free will at the time, and was wrong about the BP split (that part is understandable, seeing this vague contract and its unprofessional back of the napkin phrasing).

The other side has responded only with a vague statement that specifically only denies the BP split (on which they appear to be correct from the odd contract), delivered via a proxy who then moved the thread to the watercooler to lessen visibility and then made a provably false claim that a history of doing this with things that might end up not reflecting well on Lelands is' made up crap'. Unusual response if there is nothing to see here, but the burden of proof rests on he who makes the claim. IF the collection was cherry picked for only the high value items, then 60/40 is absurd and IF he is getting billed for ridiculous 16% interest rates with a contract that mentions no interest rates at all, then Lelands is horribly in the wrong, but that's not proven. OP has shown evidence for half the claims, but should prove the other half or they do not have much of any validity.

Why does he need to prove his claim here? From his first of two posts, his apparent primary purpose was to try to find a lawyer to help him. That he has not returned suggests he does not care about the court of public opinion, and maybe he shouldn't, what good will it do him?