Sale contracts? Yay or nay

[Omegamanic]

I wouldn't object to signing something, if I was meeting face to face and could see the goods and the contract. I've provided a few of sales letters in the past, but nothing more than an acknowledgement of the sale.

Generally I haven't felt the need for anything in writing with purchase and sales I've made on the forum. If someone feels it provides them with more comfort, then I guess that's fine - plus, if there was something to cover the situations were a watch has turned out to be fake, or previously stolen, then I'm all for it. For example, if someone comes across a Milguass GV with my name on the paperwork (warranty card) - then the watch is stolen.

[markrlondon]

They would be valid and enforceable here in the UK (indeed anywhere in the world), but some may feel they are not worth the paper they are written on (because would you really start legal proceedings against another for a watch, they take that extra bit of time to write out, bla bla)...curious to see what people think...and if indeed it is or isn't in the spirit of the forum?

I answered Yay in the poll above but only because a contract already exists by default, doesn't it. As long as one keeps the evidence (original advert, communications, proof of payment, proof of sending/delivery, etc.) then that is surely all that is needed to realistically and practicably go to court should it become necessary (assuming that one also has the real name and address of the other person in the transaction).

The kind of scam that you experienced would not have been prevented or your problems alleviated if you had had a formal written contract with the scammer.

So the question is: What would a formal written contract offer over and above what we already have?

[Chris_X]

I answered Yay in the poll above but only because a contract already exists by default, doesn't it. As long as one keeps the evidence (original advert, communications, proof of payment, proof of sending/delivery, etc.) then that is surely all that is needed to realistically and practicably go to court should it become necessary (assuming that one also has the real name and address of the other person in the transaction).

The kind of scam that you experienced would not have been prevented or your problems alleviated if you had had a formal written contract with the scammer.

So the question is: What would a formal written contract offer over and above what we already have?

You're right, it doesn't add much legally other than formality and containing all terms in one place.

Personally i thought it added to the element of trust and upfrontness and clarity...but seems most feel it creates the opposite, namely an element of suspicious eagerness?

[Chris_X]

After reading all the comments so far, I would prefer to not use a sales contract, but I would not oppose to use one if it gave the buyer or seller confidence in the deal. In the end, it is all about trust and honesty.

Yep!

[robert75]

You're right, it doesn't add much legally other than formality and containing all terms in one place.

Personally i thought it added to the element of trust and upfrontness and clarity...but seems most feel it creates the opposite, namely an element of suspicious eagerness?

Unfortunately so Chris, I understand what you are trying to do but for most people on watch forums this and others people deal with like minded enthusiasts to me what you are considering would be if we are dealing with dealers.

If I was buying a used car perhaps I would think differently as I would probably never see that person again it's a bit different on a forum where you are dealing with people with shared interests.

[Chris_X]

Unfortunately so Chris, I understand what you are trying to do but for most people on watch forums this and others people deal with like minded enthusiasts to me what you are considering would be if we are dealing with dealers.

If I was buying a used car perhaps I would think differently as I would probably never see that person again it's a bit different on a forum where you are dealing with people with shared interests.

Again, some very profound comments here...

I think I see that perfectly now and appreciate the sentiments...I certainly agree with them

To all the gents on here, let the spirit of the forum remain and grow...!

[alas58]

I've used something similar to buy and sell cars before, except I called it an 'Agreement of Sale', which sounds less threatening. It just documents the buyer and seller's details, what's being sold, and for how much. It's less for protection (such as you have, you have anyway) and more to have a single piece of paperwork that documents the transaction (eg for insurance purposes).

The above is a very good point as I do the same if selling a car. Even the last one which was to a very good friend and for less than I've paid for a watch. Although that may be because of insurance, road offences etc to prove you do not own the item any more.
I voted No but after reading the thread do not see a problem if someone asked me to sign one.

[MB2]

I can see both sides here - sure it is nice to have something in writing agreeing the goods are genuine & I think the understanding over the delivery and transfer of risk is useful in case of any ambiguity...however...I would expect many here have and would go far beyond the terms of this contract if for example a fault developed in a recently sold watch. I did the same with an iPhone I sold here provided all the information so the purchaser could claim under the Apple warranty or offered to do it for him and I am sure would be the same if an unexpected service was needed etc. etc.

Your agreement that "embodies the entire understanding" whilst good for the vendor in many cases is in my opinion against the "spirit of the forum" and reduces not increases the buyers protection in my reading of it.

I do agree clear documentation of the payment and transfer of risk as well as a period for rejection is a good idea but not sure it needs to be in the form of a contract so I also voted no after some deliberation.

[markrlondon]

Personally i thought it added to the element of trust and upfrontness and clarity...but seems most feel it creates the opposite, namely an element of suspicious eagerness?

I understand your intent but, yes, I think it would seem out of place and inappropriate on a forum like this one.

That said, I probably wouldn't object if someone I was buying from or selling to wanted to use such a contract (even though I'd probably think it quite odd).

[RAJEN]

The day people start with these,I would stop buying/selling on the watch fora.
Would suck out the joy of the hobby.

[TimeOut]

For my previous 3 car sales (via Pistonheads) I've used the AA printable private seller contract. Both me and the buyer(s), who on each occasion was a complete stranger to me, were happy to sign each time.

For acquiring high value wristwatches from an unknown source such as Gumtree, one might reep the somewhat questionable benefit of such a contract; possibly upon the discovery of a fake or stolen watch changing hands. I wouldn't buy an expensive watch on Gumtree but I know people that have.

Noncontractual sales within the collective power of a forum remain successfully reliant on a bond of human trust; impossible to replace with a written agreement.

[robt]

You're right, it doesn't add much legally other than formality and containing all terms in one place.

Personally i thought it added to the element of trust and upfrontness and clarity...but seems most feel it creates the opposite, namely an element of suspicious eagerness?

I voted Nay for the same reasons Mark voted Yay. I'll go a bit further into why it's a bad idea. There's a principle in software engineering known as "dry" - Don't Repeat Yourself. It's a good principle that applies more broadly. This is an excellent example of that.

The problem with adding a formal contract on top of an existing informal contract is that everything in the two sets of documents has to agree 100% (notwithstanding judicious use of notwithstanding). For example, the posted sample mentions Rolex (in at least two different sections). What if it's not a Rolex? It mentions papers and accessories. What if it doesn't have those, or worse, has some but not all?

As a lawyer you're obviously in a good position to re-draft the contract correctly, but others are just as likely to make mistakes and introduce contradictions. What's worse than no contract? An ambiguous and contradictory contract.

In an effort to avoid some of this, the sample contract references such things as "photos of condition", which in practice could include statements made by PM, emails, and post(s) - some of which can be edited after the fact. So in fact, in order to properly enforce this contract, you'd still need to dig up (and possibly have pre-saved) all the supporting documentation, thus defeating it's original purpose, only now you also may need to defend contradictions. That's not good, considering the extra time spent and the potential loss of buyers/sellers willing to agree to the contract in the first place.

All this is potentially made worse with contract law placing the burden of correctness on the contract author, which may not be the same person to have written the original sales post. This could potentially leave you in a worse position than if you simply hadn't bothered with the contract at all.

[TimeOut]

If the lawyer says no it's definietly a bad idea.

[robt]

If the lawyer says no it's definietly a bad idea.

Just to clarify, I'm not a lawyer. Chris said he was a lawyer. This however is a good illustration of my point about non-lawyers amending legal documents ;-)

[WILLD]

Having never bought or sold a watch privately I think formalising the contract in writing would add a level of reassurance and therefore yes I would theoretically use.

Envisage the dangers being completing the form correctly, not falling into a false sense of security with non-vetted sellers and maintaining a degree of common sense.

[GIB984]

In a world increasingly full of sheisters and scammers this place is, on the whole, a joy to behold and I actually have had pleasure from dealing with everyone I have on a trust basis. I also relish the squirming objections and vitriolic comments from others when they find out we exchange watches and money worth thousands, often with people we have never met.

Long may it continue.

[Chris_X]

I can see both sides here - sure it is nice to have something in writing agreeing the goods are genuine & I think the understanding over the delivery and transfer of risk is useful in case of any ambiguity...however...I would expect many here have and would go far beyond the terms of this contract if for example a fault developed in a recently sold watch. I did the same with an iPhone I sold here provided all the information so the purchaser could claim under the Apple warranty or offered to do it for him and I am sure would be the same if an unexpected service was needed etc. etc.

Your agreement that "embodies the entire understanding" whilst good for the vendor in many cases is in my opinion against the "spirit of the forum" and reduces not increases the buyers protection in my reading of it.

I do agree clear documentation of the payment and transfer of risk as well as a period for rejection is a good idea but not sure it needs to be in the form of a contract so I also voted no after some deliberation.

That's fair reasoning and you're right, it's nice to see forum members go beyond the terms of the agreement - that's true spirit

[Chris_X]

The day people start with these,I would stop buying/selling on the watch fora.
Would suck out the joy of the hobby.

That's a bit extreme...rest assured that's no bodies intention!

[Chris_X]

For my previous 3 car sales (via Pistonheads) I've used the AA printable private seller contract. Both me and the buyer(s), who on each occasion was a complete stranger to me, were happy to sign each time.

For acquiring high value wristwatches from an unknown source such as Gumtree, one might reep the somewhat questionable benefit of such a contract; possibly upon the discovery of a fake or stolen watch changing hands. I wouldn't buy an expensive watch on Gumtree but I know people that have.

Noncontractual sales within the collective power of a forum remain successfully reliant on a bond of human trust; impossible to replace with a written agreement.

True, a contract can't replace the bond of human trust...indeed, it's now questionable whether a contract even undermines that trust in a community such as this

[Knisse]

If i deal in person there is almost always some kind of contract (if other local danes), but if i ship overseas then i have never used it. I have sold multiple watches on various forums (mostly watchuseek) and never had any issues what so ever.

So contracts, yay if someone in the deal prefers it, but its more for your own peace of mind than anything else i think.

[Chris_X]

I voted Nay for the same reasons Mark voted Yay. I'll go a bit further into why it's a bad idea. There's a principle in software engineering known as "dry" - Don't Repeat Yourself. It's a good principle that applies more broadly. This is an excellent example of that.

The problem with adding a formal contract on top of an existing informal contract is that everything in the two sets of documents has to agree 100% (notwithstanding judicious use of notwithstanding). For example, the posted sample mentions Rolex (in at least two different sections). What if it's not a Rolex? It mentions papers and accessories. What if it doesn't have those, or worse, has some but not all?

As a lawyer you're obviously in a good position to re-draft the contract correctly, but others are just as likely to make mistakes and introduce contradictions. What's worse than no contract? An ambiguous and contradictory contract.

In an effort to avoid some of this, the sample contract references such things as "photos of condition", which in practice could include statements made by PM, emails, and post(s) - some of which can be edited after the fact. S
o in fact, in order to properly enforce this contract, you'd still need to dig up (and possibly have pre-saved) all the supporting documentation, thus defeating it's original purpose, only now you also may need to defend contradictions. That's not good, considering the extra time spent and the potential loss of buyers/sellers willing to agree to the contract in the first place.

All this is potentially made worse with contract law placing the burden of correctness on the contract author, which may not be the same person to have written the original sales post. This could potentially leave you in a worse position than if you simply hadn't bothered with the contract at all.

Very thoroughly considered comments here.

Usually contracts include "entire agreement clauses" to deal with issues of DRY as you describe...as does the form I used. Having said that, it does rely on keeping/saving any emails/pms/threads - I agree that's what would be needed anyway for an informal contract and so a written contract may seem an unnecessary piece of paper...hence why it only really makes things a bit more complete should you enforce, but the age-long problem of enforcement generally remains.

But you make a good point that you can never just use template documents without reading/drafting them properly.

[Chris_X]

In a world increasingly full of sheisters and scammers this place is, on the whole, a joy to behold and I actually have had pleasure from dealing with everyone I have on a trust basis. I also relish the squirming objections and vitriolic comments from others when they find out we exchange watches and money worth thousands, often with people we have never met.

Long may it continue.

Agreed, especially to the second half of that statement...imagine telling your partner and friends you're still trading watches over the internet not even a year after getting scammed for £2.5k

[Chris_X]

If i deal in person there is almost always some kind of contract (if other local danes), but if i ship overseas then i have never used it. I have sold multiple watches on various forums (mostly watchuseek) and never had any issues what so ever.

So contracts, yay if someone in the deal prefers it, but its more for your own peace of mind than anything else i think.

That's why I started using the contract, for my re-assurance, but recently found a bit of odd-balling from one or two users on here...hence my OP

[jwg663]

It's a 'nay' from me.

This place runs on trust & it works 99.99% of the time.

Most people don't really know the other members except by their on-line persona. Would a contract give me 'comfort'? I can make my own mind up about members on here by their history, posting style & behaviour, so it wouldn't really.

Those that require advice on everything from car colour to sock length may differ in that.

[magirus]

It's a 'nay' from me.

This place runs on trust & it works 99.99% of the time.

Most people don't really know the other members except by their on-line persona. Would a contract give me 'comfort'? I can make my own mind up about members on here by their history, posting style & behaviour, so it wouldn't really.

Those that require advice on everything from car colour to sock length may differ in that.

The above sums up my feelings on the subject.

[Chris_X]

It's a 'nay' from me.

This place runs on trust & it works 99.99% of the time.

Most people don't really know the other members except by their on-line persona. Would a contract give me 'comfort'? I can make my own mind up about members on here by their history, posting style & behaviour, so it wouldn't really.

Those that require advice on everything from car colour to sock length may differ in that.

I follow that reasoning perfectly...seems most on here agree with this

[stuie-t]

I don't think there is a need for sale contracts, but some kind of receipt for the purchase would definitely be useful. Example scenario: you flip a watch that you have bought on the forum, it goes missing in the post so you have to claim on the postal insurance. How do you prove the value of the watch, and that you owned it? It hadn't occurred to me in the past, but an incoming Rolex has gone missing in the post and made me think.

[markrlondon]

it goes missing in the post so you have to claim on the postal insurance. How do you prove the value of the watch, and that you owned it?

In this case you show the Royal Mail or other insurer the proof of payment. E.g. PayPal transaction confirmation, bank statement, etc. This type of evidence can quite legitimately be a screen print.

If the insurer doesn't believe the print out on its own then they can and will enquire further with you.

Things are a bit more difficult if you were swapping or part-exchanging a watch or sending it, for example, for a service. In such cases you'd need some other evidence of the value of the watch, such as copies of communications or insurance valuations, etc.

Always keep your emails and PMs. These are evidence.

[Backward point]

The OP has been here for a very short time and clearly, as he has contributed very little, doesn't understand that the sales on the Forum are based largely on trust and reputation.

Trust that is built up by getting to know a seller by their online persona which can be ascertained by their posting history. Reputation, which can be ascertained by their posting history and via H&V.

Avoid the speed-posters who have rattled up 250 posts of gibberish and "Nice watch!" in order to gain access to Sales Corner and deal with somebody who has built a reputation which they wouldn't want to risk in a bad deal.

Contracts for sales on TZ-UK smack of paranoia and as Raj said, will suck the joy out of dealing on SC.

[Chris_X]

The OP has been here for a very short time and clearly, as he has contributed very little, doesn't understand that the sales on the Forum are based largely on trust and reputation.

Trust that is built up by getting to know a seller by their online persona which can be ascertained by their posting history. Reputation, which can be ascertained by their posting history and via H&V.

Avoid the speed-posters who have rattled up 250 posts of gibberish and "Nice watch!" in order to gain access to Sales Corner and deal with somebody who has built a reputation which they wouldn't want to risk in a bad deal.

Contracts for sales on TZ-UK smack of paranoia and as Raj said, will suck the joy out of dealing on SC.

Yes, I can see that and I am very happy this is the kind of place where people definitely prefer to have their word be their bond.

I've only been on here for about a year, so hopefully I can build up that trust and reputation with everybody...certainly I've had several good deals and feedback on WUS and good H&V comments.

[MartynJC (UK)]

It's a 'nay' from me.

This place runs on trust & it works 99.99% of the time.

Most people don't really know the other members except by their on-line persona. Would a contract give me 'comfort'? I can make my own mind up about members on here by their history, posting style & behaviour, so it wouldn't really.

Those that require advice on everything from car colour to sock length may differ in that.

same from myself for these reasons. 'Na' from me.

And this is (still) Eddies site so it's his rules not ours. SC rules are on a sticky on that sub-forum for all to abide by if we want to look at regulations.

In terms of contract as Ralph has mentioned - be prudent and keep a paper trail of correspondence in case of disputes, makes sense. If you're unsure or need a valuation then get the watch valued. Most ADs offer this service.

Happy shopping

Martyn

[TimeOut]

Combined with the associated symposia, having the opportunity to play 'mini dealer' (without the profits of course), is for the serial flipper, the single greatest appeal of a watch forum.

Written contracts would take things a step further away from just playing and into something more serious and perhaps less friendly.

Vive la joie!

[alas58]

Poor memory here but others can maybe think of the scams that have taken place on the forum (i remember a Brietling and a Rolex recently) and would a contract have helped in any way to get cash back or prosecute. This might be the answer to whether contracts are needed or viable.

[Chris_X]

Poor memory here but others can maybe think of the scams that have taken place on the forum (i remember a Brietling and a Rolex recently) and would a contract have helped in any way to get cash back or prosecute. This might be the answer to whether contracts are needed or viable.

Mine was the Rolex scam...!

As mentioned previously, I had the contract there and it proved.....regrettably...useless!

My intentions in this thread where to ascertain the forums "feelings" about using a contract...I'm happy to see trust reigns far supreme over any signed piece of paper