Oldgas.com Home
Posted By: BryceG Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 04:25 PM
I recently bought a rather expensive sign ($2k) from a large auction house, and this was the exact description:

"Has chips in outer field and perimeter, sign has a light coat of clear over it, marked copyrighted 1900 & Balt Enl & Nov Co NY. Rated 7.9. Condition (Good). Size 30" D."

I got the sign home and started stripping the clear coat (as I have done with several signs because I'd rather have a dull sign than a clear-coated one). As I stripped the clear coat, the field of the sign began coming off exposing the bondo underneath.

At this point I realized the sign had been restored, so I took pictures and contacted the auction house. They said tough luck and that they will not do anything about it. They stand behind it that it was described correctly.

My question to the OG community: Am I a fool for trusting the description & taking it for what it said? Or is the auction house to blame for being purposefully misleading and/or negligent?

.
Posted By: advertologist Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 04:32 PM
sounds like the auction house condones this type of activity - there description didn't disclose this &
a reputable auction house would make it right ... cool
Posted By: Done4 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 04:48 PM
One would think they should help. But I always call and ask questions if I'm not going to be there, I too have been burned, to increase my chances that I won't be had again I try to get as much info as possible. Unfortunately I don't trust to many auction houses or sellers when bidding on line.
Posted By: K W FRITH Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 04:59 PM
Another good argument for never buying a clear coated sign.
It was put on there for a reason--most likely to cover something up!
Posted By: advertologist Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 05:13 PM
Originally Posted By: K W FRITH
Another good argument for never buying a clear coated sign.
It was put on there for a reason--most likely to cover something up!


totally agree, there's a lesson too be learned here ... cool
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 05:32 PM
Kevin, I agree, and the lesson has been learned.

However, I am still having a hard time not holding the auction company accountable to know what they are selling. If you don't know what is under the clear, then that should be stated. The wording really gets me fired up on this one, how they used the word 'lightly' clear coated. and how do you rate a sign a 7.9 without knowing what exists under the clear?

if that is the case, can I have a fully restored sign sold in similar fashion and describe it as 'sign has been cleared' and rate it a 9.8? I doubt it.

To me, its an example of the greed that exists in the auctioneer world today. We've all seen it, selling repros as original, purposefully misleading descriptions, and not taking accountability. If I sold this sign in the same manner with the same description on oldgas to a member, and the same thing happened... how would everyone expect me to respond? but for some reason people are willing to give an auction house a free pass. I've about had enough of it all.
Posted By: Mike M. Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 05:39 PM
Agreed! If the word clear coat is used, it had better be in my hands for close inspection.

Like Bryce I have had a few that were clear coated to make them shine again that I have stripped and coated them in Howards Feed n wax and they look great so I see why you bid, but again you have to look close for more than just clearcoat.

It would be great to know who the auction company was that should of marked it as restored.
Posted By: Dave's Garage Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 05:50 PM
You are making the assumption that, the auction house; somehow, knew what was under the paint. They only know what they are told when the item is consigned. Most times by a flipper that knows even less then the auctioneer about the sign or item they are consigning.

You, yourself had the sign in your possession and were unable to determine that it was more then a clear coated sign. You are for some reason expecting the auctioneer to have greater extra sensory powers then you.

Why should the auction house take it back after you have stripped the paint off of it? Let`s be real it`s one thing to return an item in the same condition as when you purchased it and another to monkey with it and then expect a full or partial refund.

Have you ever read the binding contractual agreement that you enter into on the back of the bidding cards or pay attention to the first statement made by an auctioneer at the start of an auction?

Auctioneers clearly state that you should examine the items and confirm for yourself what you are bidding on. As an on line bidder you choose to fore go that level of protection.

I'm not singling you out, or calling you out. I'm just shedding light on the other side of the coin. Sometimes we need to shoulder some of the responsibility for the situation we find ourselves a party to.


Posted By: Cold Pizza Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 05:59 PM
Is this the sign & auction co. in question Dave?
You said 2K,but they show it sold for $1500.00,so I'm not sure.
https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/36046687_hp-hood-and-sons-milk-single-sided-porcelain-sign
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 06:08 PM
Dave, I understand that side of it.

But to me, the auction house is one link in a supply chain. When an incident or defect occurs, you dont just point to some legal BS on a waiver, you follow that defect down the supply chain until you get to the responsible party.

If the auction house truly had no suspicions of it being restored, then the responsible party here was the consignor. To me, there should be the same disclaimers signed by the consignor as the buyer... they should be signing something that says "I hereby take responsibility that I have accurately & fully disclosed the current state of each item consigned."

Then when something like this happens, the AUCTION HOUSE can show some due diligence and the correct party gets nailed. Instead of always just passing the buck to the unsuspecting buyer.

Once again, I know there is plenty ways around this for the auction house, but its a matter of the integrity/word of your business and how much you care about that.
Posted By: Dave's Garage Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 06:48 PM
I also see your side of this as well and the validity of some of the points you raise.

Now, it's my turn to make an assumption. I'm assuming that Rick has correctly identified the sign in question. If that is the case.

A compelling argument could be made that there was a level of deception possibly by who ever partially restored that sign. Fair to say that by doing so, when looking at the photo and the description of clear coated finish. One could possibly be tricked into a false sense of confidence that it has only been clear coated due to the other visible chips. Very few prudent buyers would even for a moment consider that only some partial restoration to areas with porcelain loss would have been done. The wear on the sign looks very honest and one would not assume that there may have been more underlying condition issues with it.

Needless to say, I don't think you acted foolishly. Anyone of us could have been exploited by those pictures and that description. However, I'm not fully convinced that the auction house has done something wrong because they could have also been deceived by the appearance of the sign.

Byrce, I agree with you that; A true measure of a good business is when they go above and beyond what can reasonably be expected of them.
Posted By: Cold Pizza Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 07:43 PM
Sorry guys,in my earlier reply,I meant to say that to Bryce,not Dave.
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 07:52 PM
that is the sign Rick... I was attempting to get unbias responses from everyone by not mentioning the company
Posted By: carolinaskies Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 08:00 PM
The auction house description is misleading, putting the onus on them. Simply stating a clear coat they should have said "possible restoration" in the description so the bidders would be forewarned to check the sign over.

A quick use of a black light & weak magnet should have shown restoration, and indeed if it is the one that Cold Pizza indicates it's an auction house that should know better. They should make it right.

Small auction houses that just sell an occasional sign you might begrudge for not knowing about restoration. But any auctioneer who makes it a regular part of their business should be held to a higher standard of accuracy in description(for regular sign auctions they should be held to the highest standard). It's up to the buying community to make the auctioneers responsible too, so reporting them to the BBB is a first step after initial contact with the auction advising them you are getting ready to call the BBB.

It's harder to establish a good reputation if word of mouth gets around the auction house refuses to make it right.
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 08:15 PM
...given that the sign appears to be unrestored, given the numerous chips, I'd say your assumption that the description was honest was understandable...they should make this right, and let the consignor eat it...
Posted By: Watchdog9 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 08:16 PM
I was asked to move this to non-petro because of the nature of the sign, but I believe the gist of the topic relates to advertising signs in general and that would include gas & oil signs!
This is a topic of great importance to many collectors of Gas & Oil memorabilia and should be discussed. Remember that discussions on specific non petro items, needs to be done in the non petro area. Thanks
Posted By: DCpate Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 09:05 PM
I fault the auction house for their usage of "light coat of clear coat"

Otherwise, I'd say you were out of luck.

They oughta offer half back for incorrect "light coat" description imo

And yeah, I'd only buy a clear coated sign cheap in the future...
Posted By: gasmansgp Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 09:22 PM
Bryce, Sorry for your pain. In my opinion though, I think that the auction house wording was adequate. I'd bet that they had no idea of this issue? How many buyers out there would strip the clear off a porcelain sign? Probably not many? Personally, I detest buying something at auction, unless I have inspected it the day of the sale. As for the responsibility of the co-signor, a sale is a sale is a sale....it ends with his presentation of the item to the auctioneer. You might not like this. I have been a co-signor in many auctions, and any issues with my items are accepted once bid on. At auctions you take chances. Sometimes you do well and sometimes not? A law of averages. Paul www.severngaspumps.com
Posted By: 2 Gallon Luke Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 09:37 PM
NEGLIGENCE OF THE AUCTION HOUSE!! The item was described wrong, plain and simple..
Posted By: Lastgas15 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 09:43 PM
Originally Posted By: Dave's Garage
...I don't think you acted foolishly. Anyone of us could have been exploited by those pictures and that description. However, I'm not fully convinced that the auction house has done something wrong because they could have also been deceived by the appearance of the sign.



I agree with Dave.
If you were fooled by the restoration it's possible they were too.

Even if you could have convinced the auction house to set aside their terms and conditions I think you sealed your fate when you altered (stripped) the sign.

It's easy to say the auctioneer should refund your money, but what if they really didn't know? Maybe the consignor knew, maybe not?

What's the difference in value between the unrestored condition and the perceived condition at which you based your bid?
Posted By: 66phillips Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 10:44 PM
Sure the auction house could tell it had been partially restored. They have a sign expert on their staff. They should offer some compensation, or a full refund.
Posted By: philmccauley Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 11:07 PM
Can we see the item and the auction house info?
Posted By: poorpumper Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 15 2015 11:22 PM
If I may add my 2 cents: You can threaten the auction house that you will contact your home State Attorney General's office. One of their responsibilities is to protect their home state consumers regarding their purchases, regardless of where purchased. If the auction house knows anything about consumer and business law, they will not want to deal with an AG. Your home state AG will contact the AG of the auction house state. If they are held liable, they will be forced to make it good and can also be fined. If you don't get satisfaction doing that, then make a formal complaint to your AG. If you don't have a local office, call them by phone. Should find them in the State Government section of your phone directory. They will mail you a packet to fill out and return with all information. I guarantee, that if you have any possibility of a satisfactory result, they will get it for you. The best thing about it is it's FREE!
Posted By: K W FRITH Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 12:39 AM
Originally Posted By: philmccauley
Can we see the item and the auction house info?


https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/36046687_hp-hood-and-sons-milk-single-sided-porcelain-sign
Posted By: K W FRITH Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 12:44 AM
Butch is right! They have a sign expert on staff and whether they knew it was restored or not, they are responsible for the listing.
They should be responsible for a refund and getting compensation from the consigner is their problem because they accepted the consignment.
Posted By: Lastgas15 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 01:26 AM
Originally Posted By: K W FRITH
Butch is right! They have a sign expert on staff and whether they knew it was restored or not, they are responsible for the listing.
They should be responsible for a refund and getting compensation from the consigner is their problem because they accepted the consignment.

They have a VERY detailed disclaimer but they leave the door open for returns under certain circumstances. While not specifically spelled out, I doubt they (or anyone else) would accept return of an item that wasn't in the same condition as it was when it was sold. So unless it can be proven that the auction company knew the sign wasn't as described I think the best Bryce can hope for is some kind of compensation for the difference between the selling price ($1500?) and whatever it's worth in the current condition. Dan Morphy doesn't seem to care what people in the petroliana hobby think so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for him to remedy this situation.
Posted By: Bob Richards Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 02:25 AM
It has been decades since I studied "Contract Law"... But, if I remember correctly?...

As Bob (Lastgas) mentioned; since Bryce altered the item he won and paid for..(the sign)..

All actual and implied Warrantees on the item that related to the Auction House; have been voided... (not even sure if the terminology I am using is even close to being correct.... I am getting so old!)

Furthermore, if I am not mistaken? It is the same as if Bryce had won a Globe. Then determined that the Globe was a repop and not as represented at the time of Auction; But before returning the Globe to the Auction House and/or it's Representative.... The Globe was inadvertently damaged/dropped/broken...

It seems to me, that the item has lost all value, as it pertains to the condition of the item at "point of Sale"... (when won and paid for)

We have enough Members who actually did something with their Education... To correct me, if I have strayed too far off the "correct" path....

As my First Sgt.; stated when one member in my Platoon asked what recourse He had, relating to the returning of a Used Car to the lot He bought it from? After the Trooper had been involved in a pretty serious accident within hours of buying the car....

The First Sgt. answered: "Son you are SOL"......

Unfortunately Bryce, I think you might also be, in the same predicament....
Posted By: carson Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 09:17 AM
the auction house got caught. They knew what they had refund the man. Often these online auctions steer a little south of the truth just to make a sale.
Posted By: publicenemy1925 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 12:09 PM
Lets see a picture of the sign now in it's present state. By looking at the pictures online it looks good to me and I would have bid on it.
Posted By: Wes Maxwell Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 12:20 PM
I do not blame the auction house as I have no indication that they knew anything was wrong with the sign, other than what they stated in the description. Whoever "Restored" the sign probably did it the way they did for a reason? I would like to see a picture of the sign after the clear was stripped off to see how bad it actually is. As for the auction house inspecting the sign more, to what level should they go? They also sell cars, should they be expected to know and state if there is any bondo in the left quarter panel of a 1958 Chevy they sell? Or know if the engine was bored out 0.030 over?
If the auction house knowingly misleads, bad on them. If they accurately describe an item as they see it after taking a reasonably close look at it, where is the issue? And if they missed something that the buyer does also, who is to blame?
Yes, the auction house could give a full or partial refund, but that could also open them up to any and all unsatisfied buyers wanting refunds if they later have buyers remorse. The auction company is the middle man, as long as they described it to the best of their knowledge, I see no issue with them.
Posted By: Loyd Pierce Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 01:12 PM
I didn't know how to vote and still not sure. Is the auction house a bad guy. Well maybe. They did state it was cleared. That should of sent up a red flag. I would of ran the other way. The fact that you didn't run a magnet over the sign makes you the loser. I would hope the auction house would black list the cosigner.
My dad always drove used cars,he put a magnet in his pocket and headed out for the next one. He came home with the slickest 59 chevy you ever seen. He was smiling from ear to ear,when us three kids piled in the back and almost stepped through the floor board. I think this was the only time he really took it in the rear. I'm going back and vote just to see the results but I don't think you will like my vote. Sorry! If you would have contacted them with proof that the sign was a partial restore before you stripped it my vote would swing. From a legal stand point I have no idea. A jail house lawyer I,m not.
Posted By: Cold Pizza Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 01:14 PM
I think this sucks for both you & the auction house..Unfortunately your issue starts & stops with them.
And two glaring points stand out to me.
1)The auction house won't take it back due to you altering it.But you had to alter it in order to find out what is going on under there,(and they will say that was your choice,not theirs),and as was used as an example earlier,it's like while returning a found out repop globe and you break it along the way.

2)You have to prove that the auction house had prior knowledge before the sale,that this wasn't as they were describing it to be.And that could be very time consuming and difficult,if not near impossible.

Legally I think you are SOL.
Morally I think they should give you a full refund and take the sign back.Then the auction house can go after the consigner,if need be.
Posted By: Ohio Oil Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 01:50 PM
The auction house is covered. Was it advertised as original, never restored? Nope. That was an assumption on your part. If there was a statement from the action house stating that all items in this auction are original, unrestored items then I could understand your thinking that they are wrong.

Dropping 2k on a clear coated sign without holding it in your hand...I feel that's on you.
Posted By: MARK SMITH Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 03:02 PM
I agree with Wes. I think he said it best.Sucks on the sign though.Mark
Posted By: junior25 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 04:32 PM
I come from old school and don't vent often but this to me I just don't get. An auction house sells a sign advertised as clear coated and the buyer is aware of this but still proceeds with the purchase. Two reasons a sign is clear coated. 1.. The sign is faded bad or 2.. The sign has been restored. For you to assume the sign is only faded is bad on your part. Then to contact the auction house and ask for a refund and get denied. So next step is to publically slam an auction company for your mistake. If it had of been my mistake here, I would have put on my big boy shorts and hung the sign on my wall. Period.
Posted By: Rsljr1 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 07:13 PM
Ditto the above three remarks!
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 16 2015 10:29 PM
I appreciate all the comments. for everyone that is mentioning the buyer agreement and/or the binding contract in regards to returning the item, that was not my original question. My question was not whether or not I can return the item... my question was whether I was mislead or not... and the ethical business practice behind it.

Daryl, you need to take your big boy pants and go back to the original post... I tried to do this in a manner that did not identify the auction company nor the specific item. For you to call me out and say that I am publicly slamming the auction company, just means that you are not willing to read and comprehend the concept of the original post. I meant this to be a constructive conversation, not a conversation about 'what Daryl would do'... period.
Posted By: Lastgas15 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 01:05 AM
The terms and conditions address what the bidder's responsibilities are, and how the auction house handles a wrongly described item. Whether that was part of the poll or not, it's an important part of the situation.

There has been a lot of speculation on what the people at the auction house knew.
The error in the description is not an ethical issue unless you can prove what the person that wrote the description knew.
Posted By: Terry Flannery Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 01:41 AM
One more reason to clear coat a sign, to keep the sun from fading it when put outside. I've done this, bought them cleared and had them done. I look at clear as a protection.
Posted By: 47reo-travis Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 02:22 AM
Bad deal. That's a lot on money to lose out on Bryce . About all you can do is maybe try to repair it, hang it , and enjoy what you can. I would be upset with the situation also. I agree with Wes on the 58 chevy car thing , just bites you got burned.
Posted By: Done4 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 11:13 AM
Sure would like to see what it looks like now so we know where the repairs are.
Posted By: Wes Hague Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 12:59 PM
I think if you didn't know when you received the sign it had bondo in it, why would you expect the auction house to know it ? I would also say that knowing it had been cleared and if you didn't like it being cleared you should not have been a bidder on that sign.

I think all auction houses say regardless of what is said on the auction block or the description in the catalogue, it's the buyers responsibility to make sure you know what your bidding on.

Definitely after you have altered the sign, you would have no way to expect them to give you a refund ( partial or full ) or take the sign back.

I think you need to chalk it up to another lesson learned and move on. Too bad Bryce, but we are always learning.. frown

ps. I personally don't think this should reflect on Morphy's Auction house or any other auction house. The situation and result would be the same.

So to answer your original question Bryce I don't think you were a "fool" or "mislead", it's just a "lesson learned"..
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sun May 17 2015 05:32 PM
thank you all for voicing your opinions... ive been trying to keep an open mind on this one.
Posted By: grabber Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Mon May 18 2015 03:27 PM
If you want to buy a sign at any auction try to get someone thats there smoke it over for you (or call the auction co and get one of there sign folks to grade it over the phone let you know issues, etc).

Even if its been looked over and graded things are easy to miss (i'd expect most places do not take a great deal of time with their grading. Once its been doctored from its sold state thats where a return/issue happens...If it were found to be a repo I am sure they'd give you all of your money back etc.

I recently bought a 8.5 rated sign (not from morphy)...I did not look at it (was sitting about 20 feet away from it)...it seemed cheap enough. Anyway when I got it down the darn thing had touch up on it all over...it should have been stated in the catalog but also I knew better...I should have looked at it before throwing my hand up. I have bought signs that were cleared stripped them and the sign under neat was better than with the clear on it...all in all its a bummer Bryce...hang it and enjoy or flip and recoup all or as much as you can.

JW
Posted By: tomzcollectiblez Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 10:43 AM
No offense Bryce, But this is all on you...
Clear coat is a RED FLAG that either means:
A) sign was faded then cleared to bring color back to it...OR
B) sign was restored then cleared. Period
To buy a sign under the assumption you can REMOVE the clear coating is rediculous and a first for me!
I have bought signs with small touch ups and removed them BUT NEVER have I ever heard of anyone trying to remove clear coating from a sign???
Auctionhouse advertised it well as cleared!...Even cleared it was well worth what you paid BUT now I highly doubt it since you have removed the restoration! Also how could you expect them to take it back LOL after you removed the restoration that someone probably paid to have done in the first place...
I would also like to see the sign in question AFTER you worked on it..... smile
Posted By: Done4 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 03:10 PM
What Tom said.
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 04:02 PM
...so, if a consignor lies/omits information when consigning with an auction house, is the auction house left holding the bag? Did the auction house 'restore' that sign? I'm thinking the consignor did...
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 04:38 PM
Originally Posted By: tomzcollectiblez
NEVER have I ever heard of anyone trying to remove clear coating from a sign


really? I get signs often that are cleared to help display the sign with better gloss. seems odd you have never heard of someone clear coating a sign to try and give it a more glossy look.

I should have better articulated the scenario... the sign was not 'restored'... it was filled with bondo and then colored black. Me personally, i did not know better... and I realize that. But a industry leader in sign identification should have known that the cows face was horribly incorrect, imo.

i would weigh in with more thoughts and with pictures, but it appears everyone is wanting to focus on the topic of returning the sign, rather than what I intended the discussion to be... which was, who is being misleading? why cant auction houses hold consignors accountable? why use the term 'lightly' clear coated? how can you rate a sign a 7.9 if you dont know whats underneath? etc.

I now realize that I took a leap of faith that I shouldn't have. and its unfortunate that all the people that have PM'd me with various opinions related to this, will not speak up.
Posted By: dalin Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 06:14 PM
over 2000 views but surprisingly only 101 people voted!
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 06:23 PM
Originally Posted By: dalin
over 2000 views but surprisingly only 101 people voted!


...and 2/3 of those who voted, lay the blame with the auction house...
Posted By: Wes Hague Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 06:38 PM
I voted and laid blame to the buyer and if you read the fine print that's what the rules in auction bidding are, online or in person.. real simple
Posted By: powerlube Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 07:21 PM
I will never buy a sign from that company unless they give a full refund. Dan Matthews always offered this. If this company will not back up there sales with a guarantee they are as good as dead to me no matter what they sell.

Sorry for the tough lesson Bryce. To bad for morphys as I think MANY buyers will continue to back away and that sellers will also be switching to smaller auctioneers then Morphys.
Posted By: Oldgas Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 08:50 PM
Originally Posted By: dalin
over 2000 views but surprisingly only 101 people voted!


I think if more choices would have been listed in the poll, there would probably been more votes.

The existing choices:

"Who is to blame in this case?
the Buyer: they were informed adequetly
the Auction house: they were misleading and/or negligent"

Additional choices could have been:

the Consignor: someone knew that the sign had work done on it
Shared blame: the consignor, auctioneer and buyer
Don't know: ?

I probably would have voted for "shared blame" because the consignor probably knew the issues, the auctioneer tried to minimize the issue with the "lightly cleared" wording and the buyer knew the clear coat was a risky red flag.

I, as well as most collectors, have taken a leap of faith that an item would clean up, that an item would be original or that everything would turn out OK dealing with a questionable seller. Most will try to balance the risk with paying a price that reflects the possibility of a bad deal. Sometimes you throw caution to the wind to get what you really want and you live with the outcome if there is no pre-established return policy.

I have a few items that I charge off to a learning experience. Leaps of faith don't always work out in vintage collectibles.
Posted By: Nicole Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 09:36 PM
Dalin,

I didn't vote as there wasn't a 'don't know' option. I also have been checking back with this thread a number of times as I imagine others were, so that ups the views.

In my industry, some people like the look of oil paintings varnished and others don't. Varnished it does give the colors, even freshly painted, a deeper look, but paintings show a lot better in galleries when they are not glazed, as the glare with the lighting can effect the views. Even when I enter the triennial competition at our National Portrait Gallery in downtown D.C. they ask the paintings not be varnished.

The only paintings I tend to varnish are the historic ones, especially with the really dark backgrounds. Again, it adds depth.

So while it may be the case here, there may be some folks buying signs who like the shiny clear coat look (DB would have called them decorators, no doubt) , making the colors look better--after all many restored pumps have a layer of clear coat on top making them all shiny looking (reflecting those lit globes and neon signs) and they have new-not faded paint.

So for the poll, put me down for an unofficial, don't know. And I would add that a really good appraiser at any action house might be worth their weight in gold to catch stuff like this. This kind of thing only hurts the action house in the long run.
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Wed May 20 2015 10:04 PM
yeah, I really wish I would have added a couple more options...

I also do believe all parties share the blame in some form, and I think you put it into words well Jim. but something tells me the other parties involved would not be willing to admit to that. and that's what frustrates me... the accountability.
Posted By: Done4 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 12:52 PM
I'm still very curious as to why you have not shown the sign in it's present condition. This would have helped determine the degree of restoration, we do have the before image.
Posted By: tomzcollectiblez Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 01:27 PM
Originally Posted By: BryceG
Originally Posted By: tomzcollectiblez
NEVER have I ever heard of anyone trying to remove clear coating from a sign


really? I get signs often that are cleared to help display the sign with better gloss. seems odd you have never heard of someone clear coating a sign to try and give it a more glossy look.


Bryce, Read what I said and YOU quoted....

Let me say It AGAIN since you obviously got it backwards LOL

NEVER have I ever heard of anyone trying to remove clear coating from a sign


I Just dont understand how you can admittingly DESTROY a signs' condition and then DEMAND your money back???
I wish EVERYONE would VOTE!!!!! The majority would be different in my opinion smile
Posted By: johninlongview Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 01:52 PM
You got a bad deal Bryce, but I do think that both parties are to blame. ( you and the guy that brought it to the auction house )

I've known some used car dealers and they don't look over cars in detail purposely because when they sell you a car, it's as is where is and if they don't look at it closely then they can somehow have a clear conscience to sell it someone to make a profit without disclosing all of the flaws.

I'm sorry about your loss. That's a lot of money to just throw away; but a very good lesson that we can all learn from.
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 02:56 PM
there was a couple reasons why I wasn't sharing the pictures, one because it is non-petro, and two because I was gearing the discussion towards the 'situation' and not the sign specifically.

but here it is:

Posted By: Done4 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 03:05 PM
Thanks Bryce, now I understand your anger. For what it is worth, I've been collecting a very long time and when I do buy a sign that is clear coated that is the way it stays for this very reason. Feel your pain man.
Posted By: KZ1000 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 03:55 PM
OUCH
Posted By: Oldgas Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 05:16 PM
Another example of the dangers to collectors with restored signs. The guy at the end of the line gets a bum deal. And the guy who knew it was restored and passed it off as real gets off scot-free with the money.

OUCH, indeed!
Posted By: Neil Gerrard Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 05:48 PM
that sucks Bryce, sorry
Posted By: 47reo-travis Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 05:58 PM
Someone was out to fraud and knew what they were doing when they patched that up . That's no diffrent from the lies and deception that currently going on at Ebay with all that faked india china Bangladesh or wherever junk. ..... I would be upset also 2k ?
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 05:58 PM
Originally Posted By: Oldgas
And the guy who knew it was restored and passed it off as real gets off scot-free with the money.


...they wouldn't, if the auction house made an issue about it...
Posted By: advertologist Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 06:08 PM
Originally Posted By: tomzcollectiblez
NEVER have I ever heard of anyone trying to remove clear coating from a sign???


Tom, well you have now- bought this sign over 15 yrs ago & one side was clear coated- the mall owner let me take the clear off the one side then said do you still want it for
what you offered- haven't done anything too it since- side 2 picture 2 was the side that was clear coated ... cool

Attached picture IMG_1521[1].JPG
Attached picture IMG_1522[1].JPG
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 06:44 PM
Originally Posted By: gulfiend!
Originally Posted By: Oldgas
And the guy who knew it was restored and passed it off as real gets off scot-free with the money.


...they wouldn't, if the auction house made an issue about it...


that was my argument in the beginning. the accountability should be passed down the supply chain. the consignor has the responsibility of not deceiving the auction house, the auction house has the responsibility of not deceiving the bidders.
Posted By: Mattgas Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 07:05 PM
I have not read any of your post here but all I will say is "that I stated that the sign was clear coated" or "clear". Either way I stated what I knew about the sign, my seller bought the sign in collection along time ago he had no ideal about the sign just like me. If Bryce could have pointed out before stripping the sign that it had been restored I would have took it back, no question asked, but he was not going to return it the same condition as it was sold to him.

This is why I do not like restored or clear coated signs, but I still have to sell them with collections.

And no I will not take the sign back unless it is in the same condition as it was sold to him.

I DID NOT TRY TO HIDE ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY, IF ANYBODY THINKS ANY DIFFERENT THEN THEIR DONT KNOW ME and I dont need to know them.
Posted By: BryceG Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 07:36 PM
so if I have Van Kannel spot restore it back to what it was (or better), I can return it?
Posted By: Signs&Neons Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Thu May 21 2015 09:34 PM
Sorry to see this mess Bryce. Perhaps your best bet to recoup as much of your investment as possible is to have it restored again, and resell it? (of course, you'll note it as restored ). Personally, I've found it's best to get rid of these "lessons". You'll never forget it anyway, but having the constant reminder staring at you (in this case literally!) doesn't help much. I would certainly hope the auctioneer would have a serious discussion with their consignor about this situation.
Posted By: JimT Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 03:10 AM
Hey Bryce. Maybe have them restore the entire sign and then have them relist it as a "10" with a light clear coat.
Posted By: Ohio Oil Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 10:33 AM
The real tragedy is that when there is a problem like this, it get aired out on the internet.

An even bigger tragedy, in this issue and in most of modern America, people have an expectation of others rescuing them from their own poor decisions.
Posted By: junior25 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 11:55 AM
Originally Posted By: Ohio Oil
The real tragedy is that when there is a problem like this, it get aired out on the internet.

An even bigger tragedy, in this issue and in most of modern America, people have an expectation of others rescuing them from their own poor decisions.


Well Said, and I can't emphasise enough that anybody involved in this market whether buying or selling should invest in a tool like this pictured. This tells you exactly what is hidden under any sign and could have prevented this situation from ever happening. Within 30 seconds a sign can be determined it's condition history.

Attached picture IMG_20141003_153052.jpg
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 01:33 PM
...what is that thing?
Posted By: advertologist Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 02:17 PM
Originally Posted By: gulfiend!
...what is that thing?


I don't know but I want one ... cool
Posted By: mcguffeyd1 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 02:31 PM
Originally Posted By: advertologist
Originally Posted By: gulfiend!
...what is that thing?


I don't know but I want one ... cool


I believe that reads the thickness of paint and the layers. Shows how many mills thick the coats of paint are. They use it a lot when buying cars and selling them
Posted By: gulfiend! Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 02:43 PM
http://www.defelsko.com/products/coating-thickness-gages.htm
Posted By: junior25 Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Fri May 22 2015 06:16 PM
Dan is absolutely correct. Simply hold it on the surface and it instantly measures the thickness above the metal. Check the sign in various spots and if the sign has been altered in any way it will give you a different thickness reading. Bondo shows very thick on this gauge and the great thing is no harm is done to the sign.
Posted By: Scott Baselt Re: Am I a fool or was I mislead? - Sat May 23 2015 02:33 AM
Expensive little devise. About $600 but if you're into buying hi $ signs well worth it. There's a used one on eBay right now for $425.
© Primarily Petroliana Shop Talk