TateWard • Art Auctions 🇬🇧

[Lazarus II]

Sept 15, 2020 14:58:27 GMT 1 Rubberneck said:

What a clusterfuck .. the buyer lost me at airmiles but definitely has been badly handled.. breaking your own rules is not a good look.

if its good enough for the UK Government.....

[Spenie]

Seems a fair out come, plenty of time to pay after the auction finished and now another day to get together the funds, probably a lesson learned by the auction house as well.

[startimeash]

Have bought a few bits via TW and never had an issue. Just looked back at some old invoices and this was on one from 25th March this year:

Please note that all payments over £1,000 must be made via Bank Transfer.

Would've made life a lot easier if everyone had stuck to that...

[Shoeless]

I don’t believe any of us can have a complete understanding of this situation. It is all mere speculation and here say based on the original post declaring a wrongdoing and now the response by Danny.
It does seem that Tate Ward has attempted to make it right and that should be what matters from a customer service point of view. Sometimes mistakes happen and whether the fault is on buyer not following terms or auction house allowing seller to back out of the deal, it appears that TW has attempted to make things right.

Just my opinion though.

[kc]

They sent the offer last night after 10pm. So less then 24 hours notice. They did not  reply back to me with questions about where the print is now and if they checked it was in the same condition as when it was in the Auction house. I am also surprised from how the vendor changed his mind in 2 days when previously stated on the phone he basically told you where to go.

I also did not appreciate being sent an email excusing me of slander as nothing I said was untrue. And the threat of consulting with your legal team on Wednesday sort of left me with a bad feeling. I am surprised you made a thread in regards to this considering your issue of me doing the very same thing previously.

I just wanted to draw a close to the matter and did not wish to comment further. 

[letterpressed]

I will be avoiding this ebay seller!

Sept 15, 2020 11:09:36 GMT 1 daniel3886 said:

The original thread seems to have disappeared (not at my request), I wanted to update members here on the outcome of the situation.

Following discussions with our legal team and consigner the following offer was made to the winning bidder yesterday.

“We will complete the sale if we receive cleared funds by 5pm on Wednesday”

The buyer has decided not to proceed. This closes the matter from our side if there are any further questions I’ll be happy to answer them here or via mail [e-mail].

We have thousands of satisfied customers, inevitably there will be the a small number of times when issues occur. We will always work to resolve these amicably and to the satisfaction of both sides and if that requires us to make a profit over reputation choice we’ll choose reputation every time. 

Consignments for our next sale (Oct 14th) close 23rd September so please send any works you’d like to consign to [e-mail] 

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 15:23:02 GMT 1 kc said:

They sent the offer last night after 10pm. So less then 24 hours notice. They did not  reply back to me with questions about where the print is now and if they checked it was in the same condition as when it was in the Auction house. I am also surprised from how the vendor changed his mind in 2 days when previously stated on the phone he basically told you where to go.

I also did not appreciate being sent an email excusing me of slander as nothing I said was untrue. And the threat of consulting with your legal team on Wednesday sort of left me with a bad feeling. I am surprised you made a thread in regards to this considering your issue of me doing the very same thing previously.

I just wanted to draw a close to the matter and did not wish to comment further. 

I guess the "We will always work to resolve these amicably and to the satisfaction of both sides" isn't true then.

[18921892]

Buyer has had plenty of time and now two opportunities to pay, I don't think he really is or was committed. It's not like he is hell bent on actually getting it as I would be.

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 16:01:25 GMT 1 18921892 said:

Buyer has had plenty of time and now two opportunities to pay, I don't think he really is or was committed. It's not like he is hell bent on actually getting it as I would be.

Did you read the buyers post? Why haven't the auction house answered his questions re: condition etc.

Would you seriously just hand over that amount of money after the previous cock up, knowing that the piece has left their possession?

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 16:12:24 GMT 1 18921892 said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:09:05 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Did you read the buyers post? Why haven't the auction house answered his questions re: condition etc.

Would you seriously just hand over that amount of money after the previous cock up, knowing that the piece has left their possession?

He got the email last night, he has had all day to get hold of them. They have phones and emails, I'm sure they are accessible and will make them so. And of course the print is in the same condition, what would they have done with it.

And they aren't responding to his queries, despite claiming that they want to resolve the matter to everyone's satisfaction.

So who knows whether the print is in the same condition, or even the same one come to that. After the original balls up, including some very strange seller shenanigans, cast iron guarantees shouldn't be too much to ask for.

[coller]

wild how many ppl are defending the auction house here, especially given the information available.

true sign of the current state of the forum.

[therivler1]

Sept 15, 2020 16:09:05 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:01:25 GMT 1 18921892 said:

Buyer has had plenty of time and now two opportunities to pay, I don't think he really is or was committed. It's not like he is hell bent on actually getting it as I would be.

Did you read the buyers post? Why haven't the auction house answered his questions re: condition etc.

Would you seriously just hand over that amount of money after the previous cock up, knowing that the piece has left their possession?

Absolutely.  If the buyer wanted the print, that's what needs to be done.

How many transactions does TW do, and this buyer requires handholding.  Poor thing, his feelings were hurt.

Want it?  Pay for it and get on with your life.

[Patrick 01]

Sept 15, 2020 16:18:35 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:12:24 GMT 1 18921892 said:

He got the email last night, he has had all day to get hold of them. They have phones and emails, I'm sure they are accessible and will make them so. And of course the print is in the same condition, what would they have done with it.

And they aren't responding to his queries, despite claiming that they want to resolve the matter to everyone's satisfaction.

So who knows whether the print is in the same condition, or even the same one come to that. After the original balls up, including some very strange seller shenanigans, cast iron guarantees shouldn't be too much to ask for.

For someone who has had no involvement in the dispute/sale what is the point in your constant speculation and general negative input?
Surely this is between the buyer and Tate Ward? You have nothing to gain here?

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 16:21:40 GMT 1 therivler1 said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:09:05 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Did you read the buyers post? Why haven't the auction house answered his questions re: condition etc.

Would you seriously just hand over that amount of money after the previous cock up, knowing that the piece has left their possession?

Absolutely.  If the buyer wanted the print, that's what needs to be done.

How many transactions does TW do, and this buyer requires handholding.  Poor thing, his feelings were hurt.

Want it?  Pay for it and get on with your life.

It's irrelevant how many transactions they do. The buyer was all set to hand over a lot of money and the auction house returned the piece to the seller at the sellers request. For this one transaction TW messed up big time and it's no surprise the buyer lost confidence. Since then TW have seemingly done the sum of sweet fa in attempting to restore confidence let alone treat the buyer with courtesy, respect or anything approaching a manner which acknowledges their role in the fiasco.

[therivler1]

Sept 15, 2020 16:35:37 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:21:40 GMT 1 therivler1 said:

Absolutely.  If the buyer wanted the print, that's what needs to be done.

How many transactions does TW do, and this buyer requires handholding.  Poor thing, his feelings were hurt.

Want it?  Pay for it and get on with your life.

It's irrelevant how many transactions they do. The buyer was all set to hand over a lot of money and the auction house returned the piece to the seller at the sellers request. For this one transaction TW messed up big time and it's no surprise the buyer lost confidence. Since then TW have seemingly done the sum of sweet fa in attempting to restore confidence let alone treat the buyer with courtesy, respect or anything approaching a manner which acknowledges their role in the fiasco.

I am not absolving TW of any mistakes here.  They should have waited the 14 days and not returned the print.

However, the buyer wasn't ready to pay - he wanted fully CC which wasn't part of the T&C.

All of that is in the past though. 

If the buyer still wanted the print (and had funds available, I'm guessing not, and that's the whole issue) he should pay.  If the print is now damaged (unlikely), then get a refund. 

[therivler1]

Sept 15, 2020 16:46:04 GMT 1 derivitive said:

Using a credit card is the same as a bank transfer if you have certain guarantees or precautions in place. I'm not sure why some members are having trouble understanding that.

...because it isn't. Not even remotely.

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 16:24:06 GMT 1 Patrick 01 said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:18:35 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

And they aren't responding to his queries, despite claiming that they want to resolve the matter to everyone's satisfaction.

So who knows whether the print is in the same condition, or even the same one come to that. After the original balls up, including some very strange seller shenanigans, cast iron guarantees shouldn't be too much to ask for.

For someone who has had no involvement in the dispute/sale what is the point in your constant speculation and general negative input?
Surely this is between the buyer and Tate Ward? You have nothing to gain here?

Simply not impressed with TW customer service. That's all. When people settle for crap service it's a green light for it to continue.

Never understood why some folk are happy for customers to experience shitty service. Do people genuinely like being taken for a mug when they hand over their money. Without customers, businesses have nothing. Fundamentals of selling no.1

[Patrick 01]

Sept 15, 2020 16:52:01 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:24:06 GMT 1 Patrick 01 said:

For someone who has had no involvement in the dispute/sale what is the point in your constant speculation and general negative input?
Surely this is between the buyer and Tate Ward? You have nothing to gain here?

Simply not impressed with TW customer service. That's all. When people settle for crap service it's a green light for it to continue.

Never understood why some folk are happy for customers to experience shitty service. Do people genuinely like being taken for a mug when they hand over their money. Without customers, businesses have nothing. Fundamentals of selling no.1

I agree with where you’re coming from but there are two sides to every story. I’m not doubting either side but sometimes there is a bullying mentality on here in that an individual or a group gets accused of some sort of misconduct and suddenly people ‘stick the boot in’ without knowing the full story. (I’m not calling you a bully)

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 17:16:48 GMT 1 Patrick 01 said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:52:01 GMT 1 Daylight Robber said:

Simply not impressed with TW customer service. That's all. When people settle for crap service it's a green light for it to continue.

Never understood why some folk are happy for customers to experience shitty service. Do people genuinely like being taken for a mug when they hand over their money. Without customers, businesses have nothing. Fundamentals of selling no.1

I agree with where you’re coming from but there are two sides to every story. I’m not doubting either side but sometimes there is a bullying mentality on here in that an individual or a group gets accused of some sort of misconduct and suddenly people ‘stick the boot in’ without knowing the full story. (I’m not calling you a bully)

TW admitted to returning the print to the seller. They admitted to getting their legal team involved so they could rectify their error. They claimed they wanted to resolve to everyone's satisfaction whilst admitting that they made an 'offer' which obviously wasn't. What more do we really need to know?

[Happy Shopper]

Sept 15, 2020 16:46:04 GMT 1 derivitive said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:42:08 GMT 1 therivler1 said:

I am not absolving TW of any mistakes here.  They should have waited the 14 days and not returned the print.

However, the buyer wasn't ready to pay - he wanted fully CC which wasn't part of the T&C.

All of that is in the past though. 

If the buyer still wanted the print (and had funds available, I'm guessing not, and that's the whole issue) he should pay.  If the print is now damaged (unlikely), then get a refund. 

Using a credit card is the same as a bank transfer if you have certain guarantees or precautions in place. I'm not sure why some members are having trouble understanding that.

Using dodgy or stolen credit cards to buy art is a well known scam. It happened to a bunch of galleries that posted on here a few years ago... The artwork leaves the gallery, then there's a chargeback on the card, and the gallery is left with nothing.

It's why galleries are so cautious, and often don't allow credit cards, for expensive purchases.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2020 18:10:59 GMT 1 Happy Shopper said:

Sept 15, 2020 16:46:04 GMT 1 derivitive said:

Using a credit card is the same as a bank transfer if you have certain guarantees or precautions in place. I'm not sure why some members are having trouble understanding that.

Using dodgy or stolen credit cards to buy art is a well known scam. It happened to a bunch of galleries that posted on here a few years ago... The artwork leaves the gallery, then there's a chargeback on the card, and the gallery is left with nothing.

It's why galleries are so cautious, and often don't allow credit cards, for expensive purchases.

This applies to every business, fraud is huge and relentless. The people commenting on here are mainly clueless gobshites.

Not one of them would sell their property worth £60,000 to a guy with a credit card..

Buyer had the chance twice and he chose not to buy.. the end

[kc]

Sept 15, 2020 18:16:13 GMT 1 @wales1975 said:

Sept 15, 2020 18:10:59 GMT 1 Happy Shopper said:

Using dodgy or stolen credit cards to buy art is a well known scam. It happened to a bunch of galleries that posted on here a few years ago... The artwork leaves the gallery, then there's a chargeback on the card, and the gallery is left with nothing.

It's why galleries are so cautious, and often don't allow credit cards, for expensive purchases.

This applies to every business, fraud is huge and relentless. The people commenting on here are mainly clueless gobshites.

Not one of them would sell their property worth £60,000 to a guy with a credit card..

Buyer had the chance twice and he chose not to buy.. the end

I did not pressure Tate Ward in accepting a card. They agreed I could pay half by card and half by bank transfer. I had no issue paying in full by bank transfer if they said no. So do not see what the issue is in that regard. I wanted the points on my card. Other auction houses do not have issue with it.

The print Is probably now worth more due to current prices,  but In the end I do not wish to do business with an Auction house in the manner they acted. End off.


daylightrobber I felt gave good input to some of the reasons to why  I did not go ahead. I appreciated his input. thank you

[woodman]

Sept 15, 2020 18:16:13 GMT 1 @wales1975 said:

Sept 15, 2020 18:10:59 GMT 1 Happy Shopper said:

Using dodgy or stolen credit cards to buy art is a well known scam. It happened to a bunch of galleries that posted on here a few years ago... The artwork leaves the gallery, then there's a chargeback on the card, and the gallery is left with nothing.

It's why galleries are so cautious, and often don't allow credit cards, for expensive purchases.

This applies to every business, fraud is huge and relentless. The people commenting on here are mainly clueless gobshites.

Not one of them would sell their property worth £60,000 to a guy with a credit card..

Buyer had the chance twice and he chose not to buy.. the end

That is all very well, but TW agreed to be paid by CC before bidding so that really isn't the issue at all. This isn't a case of someone winning a piece at auction and then trying to pay with a CC.

Going by what the buyer has said, it seems he has paid many times before using the same method and may even be known to the gallery hence why he was approved to pay that way. If he wasn't known to them and they agreed to be paid that way then that fault/issue is definitely down to the auction house and not the buyer.

[jluhiex]

I don't doubt the buyer has the funds. From his previous posts he's been wanting a banksy for 4 years now, even bid 65k on a Banksquiat last month. Probably got some extra spending cash from a hot stock pick, cashed out. Guy most likely got cold feet, buyers remorse having to drop 60k on a banksy (and probably not even one he's in love with).

I think both sides are at fault here with lessons to be learned. Danny and Tate should have waited the 2 extra days, but would the buyer have followed through with payment even then? Honestly, 30k in CC points is rather pedantic when you're spending 60k on a piece of paper. If your arguing based on principal then it's from a pretty weak position to break a contractual agreement because the auction house didn't allow you to pay half the invoice with a cc. If Tate gave you the invoice, then you know how much to wire and how much to authorize on the CC...doing anything else is just tire kicking.

[kc]

Sept 15, 2020 18:52:51 GMT 1 jluhiex said:

I don't doubt the buyer has the funds. From his previous posts he's been wanting a banksy for 4 years now, even bid 65k on a Banksquiat last month. Probably got some extra spending cash from a hot stock pick, cashed out. Guy most likely got cold feet, buyers remorse having to drop 60k on a banksy (and probably not even one he's in love with).

I think both sides are at fault here with lessons to be learned. Danny and Tate should have waited the 2 extra days, but would the buyer have followed through with payment even then? Honestly, 30k in CC points is rather pedantic when you're spending 60k on a piece of paper. If your arguing based on principal then it's from a pretty weak position to break a contractual agreement because the auction house didn't allow you to pay half the invoice with a cc. If Tate gave you the invoice, then you know how much to wire and how much to authorize on the CC...doing anything else is just tire kicking.

In those 4 years I have managed to acquire prints. But I do not need to justify myself to people who have no idea about my circumstances and that make false assumptions. I take on board what you say though and understand why you feel like that and you are correct about  me not totally loving the trolley print and it one that I would not of kept for a long period.

I thought this was all drawn to a close on our last emails... with no hard feelings and few hours later this thread pops up. I have never dealt with Daniel but another member of staff. 

 At the end of the day if you are happy to use an auction house that possibly may  allow a seller or buyer to pull  out  so easily and quickly then go ahead. I am not going to keep trying to defend myself on this issue now, especially on a forum..... so this will be my last posting on the matter.

[jluhiex]

Sept 15, 2020 19:06:00 GMT 1 kc said:

Sept 15, 2020 18:52:51 GMT 1 jluhiex said:

I don't doubt the buyer has the funds. From his previous posts he's been wanting a banksy for 4 years now, even bid 65k on a Banksquiat last month. Probably got some extra spending cash from a hot stock pick, cashed out. Guy most likely got cold feet, buyers remorse having to drop 60k on a banksy (and probably not even one he's in love with).

I think both sides are at fault here with lessons to be learned. Danny and Tate should have waited the 2 extra days, but would the buyer have followed through with payment even then? Honestly, 30k in CC points is rather pedantic when you're spending 60k on a piece of paper. If your arguing based on principal then it's from a pretty weak position to break a contractual agreement because the auction house didn't allow you to pay half the invoice with a cc. If Tate gave you the invoice, then you know how much to wire and how much to authorize on the CC...doing anything else is just tire kicking.

In those 4 years I have managed to acquire prints. But I do not need to justify myself that have no idea about my circumstances and that make false assumptions. 

 At the end of the day if you are happy to use an auction house that possibly may  allow a seller or buyer to pull  out  so easily and quickly then go ahead. I am not going to keep trying to defend myself on this issue now, especially on a forum..... so this will be my last posting on the matter.

You came on a public forum to vent/ask for advice on a matter. You then proceed to delete the original thread and say you don't need to explain or justify yourself in this matter. In the process an auction house who has built a business, employs workers, pays taxes has been dragged into this. I'm not absolving tate ward (because they did handle this horribly) but they did justify themselves with how they responded.

So just to understand the situation better, you're refusing to pay because they wouldn't allow you to pay half with CC when Tate said they would? And based on this you're standing a moralistic ground not to deal with scum auction houses that reneg on terms that they originally changed just for you.

[Daylight Robber]

Sept 15, 2020 19:33:14 GMT 1 jluhiex said:

Sept 15, 2020 19:06:00 GMT 1 kc said:

In those 4 years I have managed to acquire prints. But I do not need to justify myself that have no idea about my circumstances and that make false assumptions. 

 At the end of the day if you are happy to use an auction house that possibly may  allow a seller or buyer to pull  out  so easily and quickly then go ahead. I am not going to keep trying to defend myself on this issue now, especially on a forum..... so this will be my last posting on the matter.

You came on a public forum to vent/ask for advice on a matter. You then proceed to delete the original thread and say you don't need to explain or justify yourself in this matter. In the process an auction house who has built a business, employs workers, pays taxes has been dragged into this. I'm not absolving tate ward (because they did handle this horribly) but they did justify themselves with how they responded.

So just to understand the situation better, you're refusing to pay because they wouldn't allow you to pay half with CC when Tate said they would? And based on this you're standing a moralistic ground not to deal with scum auction houses that reneg on terms that they originally changed just for you.

What on earth has employing workers, building business and paying taxes got to do with things? Buyer got shafted by questionable goings on. TW made half arsed attempt to rectify in a manner which didn't resemble prior agreement, expecting the buyer to act immediately. They then allegedly (& quite believably imho) failed to engage with wronged buyers enquiries arising from the previous dodgy actions. Then they came on a public forum to tell everyone that they're brilliant at looking after their customers. Not sure TW justified anything tbh.

[Spenie]

www.tateward.com/auction/details/-urban-and-contemporary-art/?au=35

[Spenie]

Some nice Harland Millers and a Keith Haring original.

[Sundowner]

First 'Thrower' to auction will be interesting but the ink isn't even dry on the Stik 'Holding Hands' posters or the Miller 'Who Cares Wins'...