[RBK]

I seriously want to punch a wall!!! I found a piece by an artist I desperately wanted to purchase. I was given first right of refusal to purchase the piece and gave every indication that I wanted it.

Just received an email that the piece was sold, at a higher price, to someone else. How unprofessional is this??? I'm even more shocked bc it was not by a private collector but by a gallery.

Is there anything I can do? Sorry but I am f*cking furious over here.

[RBK]

If this is truly what the 'scene' has become I think I'm ready to throw in the towel. How could a legitimate art gallery act in this way?

[BME]

Hi RK,

That's really awful - no legitimate gallery should act in this way. In terms of action you could go all legal on them but, assuming that your understanding was oral, it will be difficult to prove that you had a right of first refusal on the piece. A more effective strategy might be to contact the artist directly and explain what's happened- few artists I know would be happy with a gallery behaving in this fashion.

Ultimately, perhaps the easiest thing is to not buy anything from them again - you could also post the name of the gallery on the forum to discourage anyone else from purchasing from it.

I hope that helps, sorry that its been such an ordinary start to your Tuesday and here's hoping that it looks up!

[jam]

Sorry to hear of your bad experience. I had a similar issue with a gallery a couple years ago over a piece. I had a verbal agreement on a Friday at a reputable gallery to buy a piece and when I returned the following Monday to pay they had sold it. Total BS... I called my lawyer for advice and he said we could sue to perform but without a contract, an email, or a deposit, it would be impossible to prove intent of sale. If you do have any of those facets you probably have legal right to the piece at the agreed price.

[RBK]

I'm hoping to appeal to them in the hopes of actually getting the piece before naming and shaming. I wouldn't have been that surprised if it was a private individual but this is from an established gallery in London. Will keep you all posted. Thanks for the support.

[RBK]

leom & jam - I do have email correspondence also - I'm hoping it doesn't come to threatening legal involvement.

I just really want the piece Any advice/thoughts from other forum members?

[jam]

rklimek said:

leom & jam - I do have email correspondence also - I'm hoping it doesn't come to threatening legal involvement.

I just really want the piece

Honestly, you should go in (not call) and talk to the owner or director. Explain that you have emails referencing an agreement and you would like to have them honor their word. It would certainly help if you have bought other works form them, so you could tell them you have been a customer and would like to continue to be one. If you are not getting anywhere at that point you should politely leave (without mentioning litigation) and contact a lawyer. It would likely not go to litigation, but a strongly worded letter from a good attorney should sway the galleries position.

[RBK]

I live in Chicago. Gallery is in London. Any UK forum member an attorney by day?

[BME]

This is a form of gazumping I suppose. Technically, if the gallery has already sold the piece to you then they are holding it on trust and you'd be entitled to ask for an 'account of profits' which would be the difference between the amount at which you bought the piece and the final selling price. I think that actually getting the piece itself (specific performance of the contract) whilst possible is a less likely result of legal action (largely because its since been sold to an innocent third party).

I know its awful but for what it's worth I'd advise against actually launching legal proceedings unless the work concerned is very valuable. What with lawyers, court/ tribunal fees etc it could become very expensive very quickly and even if you 'win' you might end up footing the cost of your part of the proceedings which could easily outweigh any compensation awarded.

Let us know what happens though... and good luck.

[dmandpenfold]

leom9259 said:

This is a form of gazumping I suppose. Technically, if the gallery has already sold the piece to you then they are holding it on trust and you'd be entitled to ask for an 'account of profits' which would be the difference between the amount at which you bought the piece and the final selling price. I think that actually getting the piece itself (specific performance of the contract) whilst possible is a less likely result of legal action (largely because its since been sold to an innocent third party).

I know its awful but for what it's worth I'd advise against actually launching legal proceedings unless the work concerned is very valuable. What with lawyers, court/ tribunal fees etc it could become very expensive very quickly and even if you 'win' you might end up footing the cost of your part of the proceedings which could easily outweigh any compensation awarded.

Let us know what happens though... and good luck.

Even though there is a 3rd party involved i would think that in reality the gallery was selling goods that it had agreed under verbal / written contract were to be sold to you. In which case even if the 3rd party has offered a higher amount then your rights would count first and the print should belong to you.

I'm no legal expert, but it really depends what the emails you have actually say.

[RBK]

TIME TO NAME AND SHAME:

Beautiful Crime
9 Ashness Road
London
SW11 6RY
[phone]

Adam Martin's ([e-mail]) actions were egregious and despicable. I still cannot believe a legitimate gallery would act in this manner. Extremely unprofessional and motivated by pure greed!

Thought all of you should know about my horribly shady experience. Will leave it up to you if a business that operates this way deserves your patronage.

[Strange Al]

Rklimek - completely appreciate why you feel so strongly about this.

You may have noticed that Pure Evil is a regular on this forum. He obviously exhibits and sells a lot of his work through Beautiful Crime, including his latest print. Given that the piece you were after has been sold, I doubt he'll be able to do anything to help you get your hands on the work. Though, maybe he can facilitate a reasoned dialog with the gallery. That said, I'm not sure that I'd want a man calling himself Pure Evil acting as my mediator

[dotdot]

This site was mentioned ealier by pure evil.

.... so do we boycott the guy or the site - PE's print is
simply celestial ...

..tricky

..

[manchestermike]

rklimek said:

TIME TO NAME AND SHAME:

Beautiful Crime
9 Ashness Road
London
SW11 6RY
[phone]

Adam Martin's ([e-mail]) actions were egregious and despicable. I still cannot believe a legitimate gallery would act in this manner. Extremely unprofessional and motivated by pure greed!

Thought all of you should know about my horribly shady experience. Will leave it up to you if a business that operates this way deserves your patronage.

Which piece was it buddy?

[slowmo]

I wouldn't boycott anything. looks like unfortunately someone was told it was on reserve, so the person who wanted it said they would pay extra on the spot. Art is no different to property, its all sold through agents looking to make a quick commission to whoever has the money at that moment.

If you really want something these days, you gotta buy it there and then. I do feel for you Robert but thats unfortunately the way it is now. Looks like the galleries are gonna be as hated as estate agencies before long.

[RBK]

I was after an original Adam Neate street piece.

I'm not here to slander or tell everyone to boycott (not that I will be upset if people do!!!).

I simply stated what happened to me (personally I think is the most unprofessional behavior I've ever experienced buying art) and allow you all to make your own informed decision.

[RBK]

slowmo said:

I wouldn't boycott anything. looks like unfortunately someone was told it was on reserve, so the person who wanted it said they would pay extra on the spot. Art is no different to property, its all sold through agents looking to make a quick commission to whoever has the money at that moment.

If you really want something these days, you gotta buy it there and then. I do feel for you Robert but thats unfortunately the way it is now. Looks like the galleries are gonna be as hated as estate agencies before long.

One would think that a gallery's and personal reputation is more important than making an extra thousand pounds. Of course I'm bitter and biased - but if I was an objective observer I would completely agree these actions were unprofessional.

[manchestermike]

Really sorry to hear about it buddy, I've seen the piece you're talking about - shitty to be treated that way

[mwjm0]

i'd be pissed off if they told me i couldn't have it after i paid and then sold it to someone else for more. if no money had changed hands and it slipped by i'd be pissed but would understand. these kind of pieces by these artists move so quick galleries have to make quick decisions. sorry you were burned though!

[RBK]

mwjm0 - I was told I had first right of refusal and was quoted a price. I told him I wanted it and asked if I could pay by credit card.

[slowmo]

rklimek said:

slowmo said:

I wouldn't boycott anything. looks like unfortunately someone was told it was on reserve, so the person who wanted it said they would pay extra on the spot. Art is no different to property, its all sold through agents looking to make a quick commission to whoever has the money at that moment.

If you really want something these days, you gotta buy it there and then. I do feel for you Robert but thats unfortunately the way it is now. Looks like the galleries are gonna be as hated as estate agencies before long.

One would think that a gallery's and personal reputation is more important than making an extra thousand pounds. Of course I'm bitter and biased - but if I was an objective observer I would completely agree these actions were unprofessional.

I agree they are unprofessional, just that in the current market this sort of incident is becoming increasingly unavoidable. I'm on your side, if a price is agreed I would expect them to honour it, but I also know that the property market in London is rife with gazumping an agreed price by someone else.

Seems to have reached the world of contemporary art in London as well now. All this christies auctions etc is making this happen, demand is outstripping supply so customer service is going out the window.

[mwjm0]

rklimek said:

mwjm0 - I was told I had first right of refusal and was quoted a price. I told him I wanted it and asked if I could pay by credit card.

thats not good then. i agree with you.

[slowmo]

rklimek said:

mwjm0 - I was told I had first right of refusal and was quoted a price. I told him I wanted it and asked if I could pay by credit card.

Sorry robert, that really changes my opinione completely. Thats WELL OUT OF ORDER

[RBK]

Thanks for listening to my b*tching everyone - I do think that it is for the benefit of this public forum to make my experience known though.

[neutral]

No offense to you rklimek or even to the bc gallery as I do feel for you but unfortunately a lot of person are actually driven by greed in all art areas. It happen more often in the street art scene than the rest seems to be, yet I do beleive strongly that the people reacting as such will do a name for themself over time.
My advise, even if you really love the piece will be to do not give them your money for a start, if you will have a new oportunity, and just live and learn as you could become obsessed by it and probably not worth it due to their dodgy behavior.
Again I do not know anything about the story apart from reading your post but I would turn the page.
A chapter is surely not the end of the book.

[Winter]

A collegue of mine was sent two original Adam Neate pieces (jpgs) from the same guy. He showed them to me to see what I thought. They were £1500 each. I'm wondering if the same two were sent to everybody who has expressed an interest in Adam Neate's work. The guy was probably inundated with silly offers and got slightly greedy. I'm sure the owner of the gallery is well aware of this forum and won't be over-pleased with the negative publicity. I have had similar experiences in the past with art purchases and you just have to let them go.

[hungrig]

Robert,

If it's any consolation (probably not), my understanding is that Beautiful Crime isn't much more than an online gallery. It holds the odd exhibition when it can find the space, but it really just seems to be a one-man-show.

Your predicament is mainly due to the lack of scruples of one individual, with no real established reputation to be concerned about. If your dealings had been with a 'proper' bricks and mortar gallery, the outcome would have been not necessarily a happier one but more likely a happier one.

Thanks in any event for bringing this to everyone's attention. Regrettably, I suspect we will hear more stories of a similar nature in the future.

In my case, I thought I had a done deal with a private seller when we agreed a price for one of his pieces. We shook hands like men. You know, both of us honour-bound. Then he used my offer as a bargaining tool to get an increased offer from another person he had been secretly in discussions with.

Fair enough that the seller wanted to get the best price for his item, but lying and misleading others is shameful. It is particularly difficult for those of us who think that "a promise is a promise" and live our lives accordingly. The slap in the face comes when we discover not everyone plays by those rules.

One of the good things about becoming world-weary and jaded is that, every so often, you can be pleasantly surprised by the words and actions of the 'good ones'. And there are still some of them out there.

[dkla]

Man rklimek, that sucks. I'm sorry thank happened to you. What was the piece that they sold under your nose?

Also, should we forum members send them an email saying we're aware of their recent actions re: rklimek and that we'll take that into consideration before thinking about doing future business with them? This is rklimek's call. If he'd rather bite his cheek and let it go, then we should all respect that, too. Revenge is a dish best served cold

[smashedhat]

Rklimek, what's happened to you is terrible, much like the housing market in the UK gazzumping is unfortunately a common practice in the UK housing market. I really hope it doesn't become common practice in this market.

beautifulcrime.com sound like a bunch of c*cks who I for sure won't be dealing with.

[RBK]

dkla said:

Man rklimek, that sucks. I'm sorry thank happened to you. What was the piece that they sold under your nose?

Also, should we forum members send them an email saying we're aware of their recent actions re: rklimek and that we'll take that into consideration before thinking about doing future business with them? This is rklimek's call. If he'd rather bite his cheek and let it go, then we should all respect that, too. Revenge is a dish best served cold

I'd rather not get into a pissing match - while I got completely screwed, I'm hoping my story will influence others to proceed with extreme caution or maybe even choose to take their business elsewhere.