Folks
years ago when I was the top of the game in original comic art, I
spent over $30grand on 2 art lots from a well known comic dealer and
another comic art dealer
about 6 months later, the art was determined to have been stolen from
a well known collection.
Once I was made aware that the art was stolen, I contacted every
person who I knew I had sold art to, explained the situation and did
what I could to buy back the art from my customers so that they would
not have to take a loss on this artwork.
Most of the buyers were very understanding, returned the art to me
and I gave them their money.
Most of them that is.
I was actually quite shocked in the behavior of one client who
believed that regardless of the status of the
now-known-to-be-stolen-art that he was supposed to make a profit on
the money he spent with me, even though he knew that the art was stolen.
Of course, he was wrong. Especially seeing as I was in the process of
losing my $37,000 because the 2 dealers - both of whom the collector
knew - were refusing to repay me the money. One, who apparently dealt
directly with the thief, later went to jail because of his
involvement in a baseball autograph fraud, and later went to jail
again for yet another baseball autograph fraud.
But that didn't matter to me.. I sold the art to my buyers and I had
to refund their money and there was no in-between on the issue.
They got their money back, I took the loss and we moved on.
That's the way it's supposed to work.
I didn't say "once I get my money back" or "go talk to the guy who
sold them to me"
I didn't need my attorney to tell me that I needed to refund the money.
I refunded the money post-haste and it caused me financial problems
afterward.. But that's what you do when you're in business
I like Debi, and I like Jim and of course Sean is one of my best friends.
I like Sue and ED.
But whether I like them or not, there is something called "what's right to do"
I don't understand, based on what I read this evening on these posts,
why Debi would have any inner debate to why she should or should not
refund the money for the piece that Jim got stuck with. If she got
the money, then she should refund it and then she should pursue
Kerry. That's the way it's done
Should Sean have outed Debi?
I actually do not see anything wrong with outing anyone who refuses
to deal in good faith with these issues, regardless of financial
ramifications as long as the issue is told in an honest and forthright way.
I don't think that Sean misrepresented the situation and seeing as
everyone here keeps asking "when do we get more information", well...
that is more information and it seems to have worked because now Debi
is talking to Jim about refunding his money and she isn't going to
refund his money because she's gotten a bad rap in Sean's email
although it seems it was a help in moving her into a position where
she wants to refund it. She's going to refund his money because
that's what she is supposed to do as a businesswoman and in doing so,
she removes even a speck of doubt to how she will handle any similar
situations that arise in the future.
Anyone who disputes this..
ask yourself.. how would you feel if you were screwed and the person
involved - honest or not - perpetuates your screwing??
I don't think anyone here would like it
Rich
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
