Re: [MV] Link to an interesting court case

From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Sat Nov 20 2004 - 08:57:34 PST


Thanks for the info Jeff. Note that the NH regulations do not cover
bidders, only the auctioneers and sellers. The Utah one you cited does
apparently cover bidders as well as auctioneers and sellers.

The problem I have with this is that the government can not FORCE me to
bid. And because of that, this part of the Utah statute bugs me...

" Collusive bidding is defined as any agreement or understanding reached
by two or more parties that changes the bids the parties would otherwise
offer absent the agreement or understanding."

So, if friends follow the general unwritten agreements of friendship
(i.e. "we're friends, and friends don't do certain things to each
other"), yet are both in an auction, then the law mandates that if a
friend bids on something that I am obligated to bid against him if it was
something I'd have bid on if he wasn't there? Yeah... right. Prove that
in court, Mr. Prosecutor :-) It is absurd when one is looking at
recreational items being bid on by friends for personal use. Totally
different ball game when the entities are commercial in nature and are
colluding for reasons directly related to their businesses.

Steve

>here is what the state of New Hampshire says:
>
>http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXXI/358-G/358-G-1.htm
>
>TITLE XXXI
>TRADE AND COMMERCE
>CHAPTER 358-G
>REGULATION OF AUCTIONS
>Section 358-G:1
> 358-G:1 Definitions. - As used in this chapter:
> I. "Auction" means the public sale of property real or personal, or
>both, in
>which the sale price of the property offered is increased by bids until the
>highest acceptable bidder becomes the purchaser pursuant to RSA 311-B.
> II. "Collusive bidding" means a practice whereby the auctioneer, the
>seller,
>or anyone acting on behalf of the auctioneer or seller, causes, employs
>any person
>to engage in, or knowingly allows, fictitious bidding during an auction
>for the
>purpose of bidding up the price of any goods in competition with bona fide
>bidders, or for the purpose of encouraging or enticing bona fide bidders to
>purchase, or for the purpose of stimulating competitive bidding to purchase.
>Collusive bidding shall include any use of false bidders, cappers, shills, or
>by-bidders.
> III. "Person" means any person defined by RSA 358-A:1, I.
>Source. 1979, 447:1, eff. Aug. 24, 1979. 1998, 17:1, eff. Jan. 1, 1999.
>
>here is what they say in cache county utah:
>
>http://www.cachecounty.org/auditor/procedures.php
>
>SECTION 4: PROHIBITION OF COLLUSIVE BIDDING
>Collusive bidding is prohibited. Collusive bidding is defined as any
>agreement or
>understanding reached by two or more parties that changes the bids the
parties
>would otherwise offer absent the agreement or understanding.
>
>And apparently if you google "11 U.S.C. 363 (n) collusion" you will se it
>comes up
>time and again in bankruptcy sales (traditionally there are not a lot of
>bidders
>there).
>
>Your argument that a larger bidder pool makes it legal is the same as
>saying "if
>25 cars are speeding then it's legal for me to speed also". I don't
>think that
>will hold up in court!!
>
>One of ebays biggest problems that they try to keep a lid on is collusive
>bidding
>with shill bidders running up items. If they don't keep a lid on it, be
>sure that
>government will do it for them, and kill ebay in the process.
>
>
>
>Steve Grammont wrote:
>
>> I should have read Alan's post before responding to Jeff :-) My limited
>> understanding is that Alan is correct. A buddy and I not bidding on the
>> same item at the same time is no different than two guys being in a large
>> public auction, sitting next to each other, and not raising a hand if the
>> buddy does. It is common practice and it is more designed to not have
>> friends going at each other's throats than it is to control the price of
>> the bidding (which is impossible on eBay).
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> >What you are discussing is apples and oranges. Collusive bidding in
regards
>> >to a federal DRMO auction is not the same- or even close- to eBay.
The eBay
>> >activity is still open to millions of other bidders, as well as being a
>> >private company. It is certainly NOT illegal by any stretch. No
matter what
>> >a small group of folks do, a million people are still able to bid on any
>> >item at any time.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >on 11/20/04 10:20 AM, JEFF HAIN-MATSON at flmv@flmv.net wrote:
>> >
>> >> correct, what you are doing is illegal!! it is collusive bidding, and i
>> >bet if
>> >> these other people are in different states, the FBI would be involved.
>> >not a
>> >> pretty picture.
>> >>
>> >> Steve Grammont wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Wow... I have "cease fire" arrangements with probably a dozen fellow
>> >>> eBayers so we don't wind up killing each other over items of mutual
>> >>> interest. Instead we email each other and see if other
arrangements can
>> >>> be made. Guess I should be looking over my shoulder for some DA
looking
>> >>> to make a name for himself :-)
>> >>>
>> >>> Steve
>> >>>
>> >>>> for everybody's information:
>> >>>> The below link should also include the same cases against the top 20
>> >people
>> >>>> buying surplus at the time on the east coast. A new U.S. attorney
>out of
>> >>>> Philadelphia was trying to make a name for himself, convinced that
>> >there had
>> >>>> to be collusive bidding since the acquisition cost vs. the sale
>price of
>> >>>> tractor trailer sized lots was so big. Several dealers pled guilty
>> >(Sarafan
>> >>>> was not one as far as i know). the charges were dropped eventually
>> against
>> >>>> the rest, and the new U.S. attorney was fired for wasting lots of
>> taxpayer
>> >>>> money on what was found to be a non issue!!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> m35products wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/sarafa0.htm
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >>>>> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >>>>> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-
>> veh.org>
>> >>>>> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> JEFF HAIN-MATSON
>> >>>> FRONT LINE MILITARY VEHICLES WEB SITE: http://www.flmv.net/
>> >>>> WRIGHTSVILLE PA
>> >>>> 717-252-4489 VOICE
>> >>>> 717-252-4499 FAX
>> >>>> flmv@flmv.net E-MAIL
>> >>>> MVPA #1833
>> >>>> IMPS #1726
>> >>>> MVT #9362
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >>>> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >>>> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-
>veh.org>
>> >>>> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> JEFF HAIN-MATSON
>> >> FRONT LINE MILITARY VEHICLES WEB SITE: http://www.flmv.net/
>> >> WRIGHTSVILLE PA
>> >> 717-252-4489 VOICE
>> >> 717-252-4499 FAX
>> >> flmv@flmv.net E-MAIL
>> >> MVPA #1833
>> >> IMPS #1726
>> >> MVT #9362
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-
veh.org>
>> >> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >
>> >
>> >===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> >To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> >To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>> >To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>> >
>>
>> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
>--
>JEFF HAIN-MATSON
>FRONT LINE MILITARY VEHICLES WEB SITE: http://www.flmv.net/
>WRIGHTSVILLE PA
>717-252-4489 VOICE
>717-252-4499 FAX
>flmv@flmv.net E-MAIL
>MVPA #1833
>IMPS #1726
>MVT #9362
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:37:42 PDT