since when auctions r governed by the law?Originally posted by tomsss:anyone saw the news just now? some guy won a bid for a 2nd hand WRX for $1.... man if he sues, wins the lawsuit and really gets the car for $1.... jealous man! yahoo auction they say... must go see lol
in effect when he won the auction to buy the car for $1, that is a business contract, so while no law really governs it, he has the right to sue and will likely win. I remember cases in the past where people have sued and won the right to buy products at prices advertised, even though the company put the wrong price to it.Originally posted by alwaysdisturbed:since when auctions r governed by the law?
depends.. whether there's any condition etc..Originally posted by HENG@:in effect when he won the auction to buy the car for $1, that is a business contract, so while no law really governs it, he has the right to sue and will likely win. I remember cases in the past where people have sued and won the right to buy products at prices advertised, even though the company put the wrong price to it.
than they are plain stupid. even though its an online auction, they don't have the right to take it like a joke, it is not only a contract bound between the seller and buyer but also between the site and the parties involved. when the buyer sues, the seller could also be charged under criminal charges if he is found guilty of fruad on top of all the civil crap. yahoo will certainly take the side of the buyer.Originally posted by Theatre Of Dreams:this is a common practice for some sellers who are using the auction site for advertising purpose rather than for auctioning. the $1 tag is to attract attention i believe. normally they'll say, no bidding, contact seller straight. well, nobody in the right mind would assume he can buy a car for $1 right?
but this is auction leh.. same thing?Originally posted by LRRP:No..all of you are wrong. The buyer wont get the car if the seller refuses to sell. Its a mere " invitation to treat". No contract is entered.
There was a precedent court case before. One of the printers distributor displayed a wrong pricing on their web site resulting in hundred of orders for the printers. High court rule that right to sell remains with the seller.
the law also says.. the price may not be adequate, but it is sufficient.Originally posted by gentlerock:I thought there was a part in contract law which states fair price. That means if the courts determine that the price is too unreasonable, they have the right to make the contract null and void right?
(This law was probably formed to avoid people cheating on duties and taxes.....like when people claim to buy big ticket items like houses for S$1 and thus pay stamp fee of just a few cents).
Oh yah, forgot....this is Singapore, so it also depends on whether its angmoh or not. If the buyer was just some ah beng, this might not even make it to the news.
Originally posted by Dounut:Well, according "Contract", if the Buyer get a lawyer to sue the Seller, Seller has to sell this car at S$1. t's a legal tender.
I am stupid enough not to bid for it ! !![]()