Purchased goods through a wholesale forum - -Does the forum owner have any responsibility in any way??

Question

I purchased goods through a wholesale forum in June 2006.
Reason I purchased was because the forum owner does states that he verifys all seller applicants.

Therefor all buyers who purchased including myself were confident.

The seller was in canada, and they had sold b4 through the forum and all had gone well, but unfortunatly when I ordered along with other buyers,, all went wrong.

The seller stated that his supplier had let him down ann their supplier had let his supplier down,, but he wasnt up fron it too some months b4 we got to the bottom of the problem.

The seller promised that all buyers outstanding money would get every penny back.

Since the begining of this year the seller has not logged onto the forum nor has he responded to any of our emails.

The seller owes an estimated $19'000 to a group of us buyers.

One of the buyers has filed a complaint at www.recol.ca, that was a couple of months ago.

Has any one been in a similar situation and what happened

Answer 1

still no experience.

Answer 2

THE BACKGROUND

I will deal with your problem from the perspective of current UK law. If you are in the USA similar laws may apply.

If the Forum owner states that they verify sellers on the forum for integrity then it may be they have breached there "duty of care" to you as a potential buyer under the tort of negligence. There are 3 components:

1. Duty of care
2. Breach of duty
3. Damage to plaintiff

Although they owe you a duty of care and you have suffered subsequent loss have they breached there duty of care? This is a hard one to answer because it would mean that reasonable steps would have to be undertaken by the wholesale Forum to ascertain a seller's integrity. What steps would be necessary is hard to determine. At the extreme end of the case if they took no steps at all then they would be liable because no reasonable person would do nothing! Furthermore, the fact you have dealt with a rogue traders seems to suggest they did very little. After all if reasonable steps were made then why did you get a merchant like that? They could have discharged their liability by doing everything reasonable in the circumstances. However, it would be no defence if you sued for them to say "that's the way we always do it" no more than it would be a defence for a surgeon, dentist or other professional. This would allow them to get away with murder!

Before you became a member of the Forum what were the terms and conditions that you signed up to? If there were any look at them carefully particularly disclaimers of resonsibility (this is where a party seeks to exclude or limit liability for loss caused to another). What does the contract say? Even if there is a disclaimer does not mean they are off the hook unless the terms are "reasonable". This is governed in the UK by the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

If a contract does not exist between you and the Forum then there are other routes to examine. Loss suffered as a consequence of misstatements (Hedley Byrne -v- Heller and Partners 1963) may come to your aid. This is where one party places reasonable reliance on the statements of another and loss is incurred. Statements may be made:

1. Negligently
2. Fraudulently
3. Innocently

Either one will get your foot through the door. If the Forum claimed that they had made them with a genuine belief it would not prevent a finding of negligence or innocent misstatements. In the case I have given I wish to illustrate matters:

A bank gave a reference (which was wrong) stating that a company which had applied for advertising were financially sound. They were not and the bank was sued. They won on a disclaimer. Apply that to your case: You were induced to buy from a dealer because you were informed they were "sound" in their dealings. Well, that was not true was it?

It may be possible that the Forum can be sued by what is known as a Collateral contract. What does this mean? This is where A is induced to enter into a contract with B on representations made by C. Despite the fact no contract exists between A and C, A may sue C. Shanklin Peer -v- Dettol Products (1952?). What induced you to deal with the company in Canada? The representations made by the Forum!


THE STING

Who can be sued? You can sue the company in Canada for failing to fulfil their contractual obligations. It does not matter where the contract is justiciable whether its UK or Canadian law they have not completed there contract even if a supplier did let them down.

The Forum may be able to be sued under:

1. Contract (what terms and conditions did you agree to?)
2. Negligence (if they did what they should have "reasonably done")
3. Negligent misstatement

Before anyone is sued it is important to know what legal jurisdiction you are operating under. For example, if the company is based in Canada but operating on US servers which law applies? US or Canadian law? Or is the contract govered by the laws of a third party in a different jurisdiction?

Another factor to consider:

A scam operating on the internet is that you often get a supplier who supplies goods for a period of some months and gets a high rating. Customers feel confident and buy in the knowledge all is well (Ebay is an excellent example). Once they have gained the customers respect they then place a huge amount of stock onto the market which amounts to millions in some cases. Buyers, induced by the high credit rating of the seller, buy without fail. Suddenly the company goes bankrupt and cannot fulfil the orders or dissapears altogether. It was a common technique used in the UK in the 70's and many got stung. The advent of the internet makes it so much easier!

Other points of importance:

1. How did you pay? Payment by cerdit card, Paypal creates seperate obligation with you and them. You can be reimbursed.

2. If you paid by bank to bank the sending bank can contact the receiving bank and track the funds.

3. If the contract was made outside the UK jurisdiction you can employ, on a no-win, no-fee basis companies to handle matters for you. Because they get a percentage of the profits they usually fight to win!

I hope this information, although detailed, has helped you. Good luck!

Answer 3

you have no legal redress on the owner of the forum at all.

he as only to prove that at the time of verification everything was ok.
if the seller goes bent after that it is not is fault at all
the only time he can get done for anything is to prove he is in league with the seller.

you can only commit a crime if there is INTENTat the outset
you cannot commit any crime without "mens rea"

so unless you can prove the beyond reasonable doubt that the forum holder was aware of the situation nothing can be gained by pursing this action,.

any answer that says different is complete bollocks

Answer 4

The owner of the forum is guilty of allowing fraudulent sales to go through his forum. That is a Crime in Camera, USA, infact in most of the western world.

However, it is obvious that he will declare bankruptcy and set up a new forum in a similar name with his wife as the owner.

The trick is in getting a lawyer early and sequesting his assets - it called, I think, a Mininerva.

Answer 5

There might be others out here but unless you list the name of the wholesaler you've been dealing with you'll never know.

Answer 6

What were the terms and conditions when you signed up for it?
You can't just take the forum's owner's word for it.