what is the proper protocol

07-25-06: Viridian
Tvad, try signing up like you are a new member, you will be asked to agree to the rules of Audiogon as a condition of membership. Please, just try it.

Thanks for pushing me to look at that link. I had forgotten about the Terms Of Use. However, now having read it again, there is nothing in the terms that requires a Seller to offer an immediate refund to a Buyer upon the loss of an item. The Seller Guidelines are not part of the terms, nor are the guidelines linked to the terms of use via HTML. There is a link in the Terms of Use that links to Auction Rules, but the Auction Rules mention only the Honor System, which is a paragraph I have previously posted.

Finally, the Detailed Terms of the Agreement section of the Terms of Use explains it clearly:

Audiogon is only a Venue
Our web site acts as a venue to allow eligible members to offer, sell, and buy audio related products via "online auctions" or "classifieds." We are not involved in the actual transaction between buyers and sellers. As a result, we have no control over the quality, safety or legality of the items advertised, the truth or accuracy of the listings, the ability of sellers to sell items or the ability of buyers to buy items. We cannot ensure that a buyer or seller will actually complete a transaction.

I like to believe that Audiogon members conduct themselves honorably in all transactions and disputes. However, it does appear that in those few rare occasions when transactions go wrong, members cannot look to Audiogon for a remedy.

In closing, I have always conducted myself honorably in all transactions as a buyer and seller. Conflicts and/or problems have been resolved honorably, but the resolutions may not have followed the Audiogon FAQ guidelines. If that is grounds for cancellation of my membership (I submit that it is not), then I will freely relinquish my membership.

Don’t want to belabor the point, but I need to correct a statement I made earlier. I overstated the case when I said that contracts for the sale of goods don’t have to be in writing to be enforceable. The contract must be in writing if the sales price is $500 or greater. Sorry for that error.

Interestingly, the Commercial Code requires that the writing be “signed” by the party against whom enforcement is sought. You can put your signature on an e-mail, but most people don’t do it. Is typing your name enough? The Code was formulated in the 1960s and its provisions have not been updated to address changes caused by electronic commerce. Somewhere a court may have addressed this question, but that kind of research is beyond my quick and dirty search.

Notwithstanding my correction above, it is important to realize that, although a contract may have to be in writing, it does not have to state all its provisions in writing. Citing the Commercial Code again, the writing must be “sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties.” Furthermore, “A writing is not insufficient because it omits or incorrectly states a term agreed upon . . .”

As to trade practices being incorporated into a contract, the Commercial Code provides::

“Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree or which are otherwise set forth in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to such terms as are included therein may not be contradicted by evidence of any prior agreement or of a contemporaneous oral agreement but may be explained or supplemented
(a) By course of dealing or usage of trade . . .”

Usage of trade is defined this way:

“A usage of trade is any practice or method of dealing having such regularity of observance in a place, vocation or trade as to justify an expectation that it will be observed with respect to the transaction in question. The existence and scope of such a usage are to be proved as facts. If it is established that such a usage is embodied in a written trade code or similar writing the interpretation of the writing is for the court.”

Finally, while it may be useful to be aware of the legal background, I sense that most AudiogoN members do not want to resort to strict legal technicalities in dealing with each other. We simply want to buy and sell stuff, not become contract lawyers. However, if you prefer to deal with an issue in a way that goes against the AudiogoN guidelines, it might be a good idea to say something about it, in a non-confrontational way, when communicating with a prospective buyer or seller.

Again, sorry for the incorrect information in my earlier post.

Bdgregory,

You are correct. I am making a legal argument (don't hate me I'm a lawyer). As evidenced by this thread, the expectations of most Audiogon members are clearly not in sync with contract law. If/when a dispute arises, most of these individuals are in for a rude awakening. Because I guarantee you, if the so called "Audiogon customary practice" diverges from contract law, contract law will win.

NT