Regency Stamp Auctions In St. Louis

The way it is supposed to work is the buyers are supposed to pay within X days and the consignors are supposed to get paid in Y days where Y is larger than X (say X=30, Y=45). Some buyers are given credit by the auction house and may have only paid say 1/3 by the time Y days are up, but the auction house is still supposed to pay the consignor all of it not just 1/3 (auction houses take out loans so they can pay the consignors on time for those lots and they charge the credit buyers a monthly interest charge that is higher than the rate they have to pay the bank).

Then there are the dead beats who are behind their repayment schedule, and it also ignores auction houses not paying on time and now you are into legal territory that I don't have answers for (except to say the banks have better lawyers than the vast majority of consignors).

IF Kols knew of the poor financial condition of Regency while still accepting consignments (which I personally believe he did), knowing that any consignment monies would be used towards the debt rather than to pay the consignors, then he should be held criminally liable for fraud.

JMAARON----It doesn't work that way . The lawyer argument is that he kept doing business to recover .
The key thing me and a lot of others are looking at is if he favorite some of his buddies and friends with payouts and left a lot of small collectors out to dry . It will also be interesting to see if he paid the APS for their consign lots or did the APS have people who fell asleep and didn't demand payment and he is in to them for mega bucks .

Then a third thing which will be interesting is the APS as a organization turn a deaf ear to all the members complianting about Regency while at the same time he was at their shows and acting as their auctioneer . This could blow wide open if these small collectors claim in a class action suit against Regency and that lawsuit pulls in the APS to disclose what they know and when . No wonder they don't want to comment on this if they can become party to the suit . {do not be surprise if this posting gets deleted ]

Time will tell if the A.P.S. and the F.I.P. wind up like the S.P.A. did. Sad.

Our challenge is to preserve our hobby for those who value it for what it has been and always be - a hobby.

Keep the faith.

Did APS had lots consigned to Regency?

In other industries, there is default insurance of some kind in case of bankruptcy by a firm. To ensure good will, the fund is financed by all industry member firms and is in the hands of an independent trust/trustee. Maybe the option where the consignor can opt for such insurance for a small fee could help. I have heard of cases where consignors have found out where their lots were being re-auctioned and went to bid on them getting them back for much less which allowed them to recover them. (If a stock brokerage house goes bankrupt, there is insurance for investors that invested with that brokerage up to a certain amount and the same with bank customer bank accounts too with deposit insurance.) Unfortunately, as it currently is, the consignor gets nothing if the consignee firm to which they consigned their material to goes bankrupt.

I posted earlier that I cannot comment regarding ongoing matters.

If anyone has a complaint that they would like to submit to the APS, the complaint procedures can be found here: https://stamps.org/Complaint-Procedure

Please note "if you are pursuing the matter with a bill collector, preparing to file a civil lawsuit, or pursuing criminal charges. APS postpones consideration until any or all of those actions are concluded."

I am assuming this means that the APS is officially looking into this matter. I find that encouraging, as I just rejoined the APS last week after leaving the APS last decade.




There is NO reason at all that APS cannot conduct its own investigation and disciplinary action independent of any separate legal actions taken. The person filing the complaint gains no personal/financial benefit from filing a complaint with the APS. Its main purpose is so that others will be aware there are problems when disciplinary action is taken. Court cases can drag on well over a year. APS investigations are much faster. If the APS investigation exonerates, that's great. If APS finds a violation, then other members get a warning there is a problem without having to wait until it's too late to find out.

I realize a person is innocent until proven guilty, but that's a legal issue for the courts. If a member has violated APS rules, that is under APS jurisdiction, not the courts. They should face disciplinary action if they have violated APS rules, independent of whether they get taken to court.

The expulsion list has a number of former APS members who were either convicted of felonies or plead guilty to major financial crimes, but weren't expelled until after they were convicted. Meanwhile, they continued to use their APS membership credentials for a non-trivial amount of time. This also includes as least one prominent convicted/expelled former member who was part of the APS leadership at one time.

Almost every credible non-profit organization that I know of will hold their leadership (or those they elevate with awards) to a higher level of scrutiny.

It will not bode well for confidence in the APS if they continue to hand the football off to the legal system when it comes to APS leadership and awardees, and then pretend nothing is wrong. Enough people are asking themselves "what am I getting for my $45 every year?". No reason to give them another reason to question the value of the their membership.

I realize you cannot comment, but I hope the APS continues its investigation regardless of whether anyone takes legal action.

JMHO

Actually, it makes perfect sense to me why the APS would withhold judgment until after legal proceedings are concluded. If the APS were to issue a judgment prior to criminal/civil proceedings being concluded, the APS could very well be called into those precedings on behalf of the plaintiff or defendent. As an organization, that is a beuractic hassle (and potential expense) that I would not want to incur.

Maintaining credibility is part of the expense of operating a non-profit. Nobody wants that expense. We'd rather spend the money on advancing our mission statement. But sometimes, you have to spend the time/money, which I would agree should ideally be spent elsewhere. But we're not talking about someone who didn't pay $10 for approvals. When we're talking about tens of thousands or millions of dollars that APS members are being shorted on... There are times when you have to risk getting ensnarled in the fray to protect the hobby, otherwise it can easily develop into an APS credibility problem.

I usually keep my mouth shut about these things, and even I am posting. It's far beyond a legal issue.

I wanted to clarify, it was posted that he was an ASDA awardee, not a APS awardee. Sorry for the confusion.

Also, I want to re-emphasize that APS may very well already be taking action -- as Scott stated, he cannot comment.

Again, I appreciate Scott's presence on this board. I strongly feel that in the past decade, the APS has largely been heading in the right direction, updating the APS toward modern technology and modern circumstances.

Sorry to have take this thread slightly off topic, as it's not about the APS but about Regency.

Back several years a well placed APS member was caught using (steeling?) AFDCS funds for personal purchases. After all legal proceedings concluded he was given a suspension for what was a clear violation of the Code of Ethics that would result in an expulsion. Not unusual in this era of lawyers negotiating and courts allowing the "plea down" of too many cases.

Scott and others: Tolerance of misconduct breeds more misconduct?

I remember that one.

The internet just ate my homework (posted a reply and got an error message). I'll try again.
I'm not sure what people are expecting from an APS investigation/sanction now. The firm is going out of existence and the main person is dying. A suspension or expulsion isn't going to get any one's money back. If it is true that they were late in paying, then an complaint to the APS might have born fruit before they got too deep into trouble. Now things are in the hands of lawyers.

I am sorry ,I didn't make myself clear ----Not a investigation by the APS , A INVESTIGATION of the APS . Am I clear .
The APS was doing business with Regency in three different ways ,also was David's buddies getting paid while the small collectors are going to be sucking wind and getting shaffed as the banks pick the bones clean . Where was the APS while the problems and compliants piled up ?
That's why the APS needs to keep quiet right now because they don't know where this thing is going and who is going to get pulled into court .
Please stop making it sound like the APS needs to look at David or Regency , the APS needs to determine who is going to add their name{the APS} to the problem .