Did Not Win My Desired Lot Even Though Auctioneer Say I Won It And San Log Says So Too

In a recent auction, I sat through the live auction via SAN. When my desired lot was up, there was competition and I had to raise my bids a couple of times to remain as the high bidder. In the end, I remember the auctioneer saying that the lot was sold to me. A check of the SAN auction log also indicated that my bid was the winning bid. When I did not receive the invoice after five days, I checked and found that the lot had been sold to another bidder at the next higher increment. The auction house apologized and said there had been an 'accident'.

Has anyone experienced something similar? I do wonder what such an 'accident' could be.

There is no excuse for an auctioneer to do this, if what you say is 100% facts as stated. They are licensed and have an obligation to conduct the sale as per that license, and the stated terms and conditions of sale.

I am not sure this thread will last long, as the auction firm won't be happy to have its name here and its conduct questioned.

Most of us have experienced mischief at auction at some time or another, but I'll leave the complaining to someone else.

Thanks, archerg ! Mods - pls delete this thread if it contravenes the rules. I am sorry if this offends others (I have removed the reference to the specific auction house).

I wish more posters would call out by name those who have caused a problem so that others can decide whether or not to have dealings with the offender. I always take a screen shot of the item(s) at the end of an auction so I have proof that everything is as I claimed. I also keep the email correspondence between me and the seller, at least until the item arrives and I've had a chance to examine it. Decades in business made me a big fan of "CMA" with phone logs, paper trails, and copies of business emails I send or receive being bcc'd to my home email account since corporate servers have a nasty habit of "losing" data at times. Sad, but that's the way things run today.

Might it have been a postal bid that was later taken into consideration?

Normally, postal bids must be received by a certain date so the auctioneer knows what bids he has on the book. The hammer price is what it says it is: the price at which the hammer comes down.

I can imagine the hammer coming down at a bid you entered at the time another bidder entered the same bid. That may appear as if you won. Usually, the bidder number is identified. If there is a next higher bid after the hammer comes down, it becomes questionable and it would be a good thing for the auction house to be identified.

I agree with Bobby. The unfortunate "accident" could have been that a postal bid (or email bid) was received on time, but the auctioneer failed to mark it down in their books.

I doubt that the auctions would accept a mail bid that was simply postmarked before the auction date and received after the auction had ended. Especially today where first class mail can take 2 weeks coast to coast.

Most auctioneer terms and conditions that I have read will say something like final bids are up to the auctioneer's discretion or something like that. Yes it would be an ethical violation if the auctioneer took the stamp away from you because they sold the stamp to someone else, like someone who called the auctioneer the next day after the auction had closed and said "I want that stamp, I'll offer you $1000 more than the hammer price."

But if it was an honest mistake in accounting, an accident on their part, then the auctioneer may have more to lose by not following their own rules and selling the stamp to the earliest highest bidder that they received in the mail.

Shame on them for not calling you to apologize as soon as they noticed the error.

I wonder what would happen then if they did call you and you wanted to raise your top bid. Would the auctioneer be obligated to continue a mini-auction between you against the new mail bid on the books? If they did that, some buyers may call shenanigans if it feels like the auctioneer is trying to scrape a few more dollars out of a lot that sold too cheaply.

A difficult situation. No matter what they do, someone won't be happy, but the auctioneer always has the last word.

If it happens frequently with the same auction house, whether due to carelessness or greed, then that auction house should be avoided. I wish the ASDA or someone had a better program for complaints and investigations. I agree that the bad apples should be publicized, but I don't think that a dealer/auctioneer should be named and criticized in a large public forum after just a single incident, especially if it was truly an unavoidable accident. It could have huge ramifications on their reputation, and we just don't know the details.


Edit: to add with whom I was agreeing.
Yes, NSK, it could have been a tie bid, but according to the OP, the SAN auction log showed that the OP had won.

@ZebraMan, didn't we have an earlier thread about SAN showing a winning bid that was not the same the auction house was showing?

@NSK, Yes I do remember that discussion, but I think the context was with unattended bids placed in advance through SAN, not with Live internet bids or with the "Auction Results Log" but I could be wrong.

For bids placed in advance, on the "My Bids" screen, it can say "Your bid: $100. Max bid $100. Sold for $100." It is confusing to know who won the lot, and I think the determination was that SAN shows the winning bid in green or red to indicate if you won or lost the lot (due to a tie bid), but even SAN showing green was not guaranteed that you won.

I have more trust in the Auction Results Log, but I have seen cases where the Auction Results Log is recorded wrong too, usually because a lot is re-opened, and the auction transactions log does not get updated retroactively.

(I have never seen an auctioneer re-open an earlier lot that sold to an Internet bidder, only to a floor or book bidder. However even that has ramifications. What if I entered a book bid of $100 and win the lot, but I am also watching online and ready to bid higher if necessary. Then 10 minutes later the auctioneer re-opens the lot and it sells to a different bidder for $110. I would have bid $120 but I have already left the auction thinking I was the successful bidder).

But I digress. Another reason the SAN Auction Results Log could be wrong is for places like Cherrystone that allow live internet bids simultaneously from both SAN and their own Cherrystone web site.

For the scenario where the OP was listening live, it still sounds to me like an accounting mistake that was discovered too late.

First why on earth is it against the rules to have the auction house name in the thread. So you can only post positive news about an auction house and negative news gets left out. I am sorry that this happened. I do have winning bids on SAN and no stamps. But that was because of a tie and someone bid first. Your case is different. The auction house should be named. And the auction house needs to make this right with you. I'm sorry is not good enough IMO. If I were running an auction, I would offer you a steep discount on another item like waving the BP or free shipping on your next xyz number of lots along with an apology. I mean really unprofessional.

It is the OP's private matter, and he/she (rightly) chose to amend the post. If the dispute is handled on friendly terms, the aggrieved party is more likely to get a better outcome.

Heaven knows we all make mistakes.

(edited, after John Becker's post:)

I would encourage the auction firm to explain here too. But, I'm not hopeful.

The auctioneer publicly announced from the podium that a lot was sold to a certain bidder when the hammer came down. Period. That should be the last word and any ethical auctioneer should stand behnd their public word. Everyone saw/heard it, and it is likely videotaped. Any apology for a missed bid, etc., needs to be issued by auctioneer to the person with the missed bid.

I recall yesterday the name of the firm was mentioned in this thread as Kelleher. Somehow it has been whitewashed out with edits. Why? Whatever firm did it should be named and should have the opportunity to respond with their side of the story. If it was another firm, then correct me, and I'll change this post, but I will not delete the name of thie firm if it is correct here.

Also, since auctioneers are licensed in their respectve states, it woud be interesting to compare the facts of this case against their state auction laws, specifically there may be state law terminology where "the hammer creates a legal contract". In parallel, the "end" of an ebay auction creates a contract and the lot is certainly not reopened because a sniping service has a glitch and their bids are not entered in time.

Another thing I've noticed in the past when live bidding is that sometimes after a few lots have been hammered, the previous lot is "reopened for bidding". I'm not sure why this is allowed but if it was on SAN then you can go to the auction and download the transcript of the auction and see if the lot was reopened.

I am sorry to hear that this happened, what a frustrating and disappointing situation.


Totally agree. It was bad for them to not acknowledge the error in the first place, maybe hoping the buyer doesn't find out and forgets about it.

But I don't think there is a legal case to be had here. The auctioneer has the last word. Whatever lawyers wrote up the Terms and Conditions have surely covered all the bases to protect themselves. Here is some sample wording from a well-known auctioneer's terms (boldface mine):


It would be good for the auction house to provide the details for a better understanding of the case. Yes, maybe "the hammer creates a legal contract", but the auctioneer has reserved the right to back out of the contract and sell the lot to someone else due to "connectivity issues" or other reasons.

"In parallel, the "end" of an ebay auction creates a contract", yes, but the seller has the legal right to back out of the contract and refund my money. This has happened to me on a few occasions, where the seller "cannot find the stamp", it is "out of stock", or the seller sold the item earlier at a stamp show and didn't take it off ebay in time. Disappointing to me as a buyer, but in the contract language, the seller has the upper hand and I have no legal recourse.

It is an unfortunate situation, but I hesitate to call the dealer unethical without knowing the facts and details about the specific situation.

No auctioneer can violate whatever his own state's auction laws are by making up a bunch of his own sales conditions. I do not know the particular laws which apply, but there may be a case here or not. I do not know. Regardless, it does not speak well for any firm that does this type of stuff to bidders.

I have been on the other side of the OP's circumstance.

I had my agent tender a bid for me in the viewing room of the auction at a major stamp show. The lot sold for fr less than my high bid. I called into pay for the lot so my agent could return it to me from the show. When I spoke with the auction staff, I was advised I did not win the lot as it showed as sold to another bidder.

I contacted my agent at the show. He went back as sorted the problem out. My with several other bid sheets were slow to get out to the auction room. Proper adjustments were made and I won the lot at one higher increment.

So as with most situations, there are at least two sides; and at time the "correct" side is not the side you see.