The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

stevel wrote: The chinese person may well have sold it on to the 'anglo saxon' person , who in turn has sold it via the eBay seller , neither of whom have done anything wrong.

In case the Canadian legislative system is similar to the German one: If Mr. Agnard can prove that he lost the phonograph unwittingly to the Chinese, no acquisition in good faith is possible, leading to the cancellation of all interim sales and purchases. Unfortunately, I fear that the whole matter is now time-barred.

stevel wrote:

Starkton wrote:I second Norman's opinion and likewise have no doubt that it is the same machine. The renewed bottom plate is there and the mouldings are again missing (leaving the empty nail holes). Within the limits of the rather blurry images there is also a good correlation in more subtle details, as demonstrated by Norman.

By the way, instead of maligning the reputation of Mr. Agnard, distracting from his own role, the seller would be better placed to cooperate. For example disclosing the identity of the "reputable Toronto dealer" and the "middle aged Anglo Saxon Toronto resident" to either Mr. Agnard or the police.

The whole thing would seem to be quite problematic - the 'sale' to the chinese person was 18 months ago .$1000 was paid then and so all that remains is a dispute over the price of the item - I'm sure the chinese person will claim that this was full payment and in the absence of anything in writing it would be difficult to disprove in law.
The chinese person may well have sold it on to the 'anglo saxon' person , who in turn has sold it via the eBay seller , neither of whom have done anything wrong.

Steve

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Steve's assessment... I didn't read the initial post carefully enough. The 18 months is problematic, but the actual problem is the payment arrangement to the Chinese buyer - nothing in writing indicating the agreed upon price of $4,500 with a $1,000 down payment signed and dated by both parties. Without that written agreement it boils down to a "he said/she said" personal dispute over the agreed upon price. I doubt that any judge would rule in favor of Jean Paul, especially since it has been a year and a half before this dispute was brought up...

Also, the claim of it being "stolen" is not accurate, since Jean Paul handed it over in return for $1,000. The clock was not stolen, Jean Paul just did not receive the full agreed upon price, which cannot be proved.

Just chalk it up to a hard learned lesson in negotiating. If you buy or sell ANYTHING and want proof of the arrangement it has to be in writing to hold water... verbal doesn't legally count for anything.

The clock phonograph has surfaced on facebook. This should help locate who has it now. The current possessor of the machine probably doesn't know they are in possession of stolen property. I was tempted to contact the poster however I'll leave this up to Jean Paul and the authorities who know how to best handle the situation.

If Jean Paul has a receipt or anything in writing, or even a text message or Email to back him up. Then I would also contact the FBI if I were him. This is now Stolen goods being sold across international borders. I would also post the bad buyer's name and information so others can not get burned by him in the future. If Jean Paul only has his word about the deal, then he is screwed. But he can still alert others so they are aware of a crooked buyer out there. I learned a long ago working on old motorcycles. Cash and a receipt only, NO promises, no stories and no worries. I was taught a long time ago, if they can not pay for it now, then how are they going to later. Sad, but there are too many crooks out there any more.
Jeff