ComplaintsforClark's Auction Co

• Initial Complaint

  12/16/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Unresolved

  More info

  I sent ***** the following email, explaining the situation... "I already paid **** for the ******* ******** ******** Print of a Woman in winter Landscape. from the Nov 06, 2022 auction. When I had bid on the item I saw the estimated price of ********* and I thought that it was a real ******* ******* ********* print. But now when I am more closely reviewing the pictures, it is clear that this is just an inexpensive offset printed copy of one of his ********* prints, and it is practically worthless. There is no bleed through of the ink on the back of the print, no registration cutout in the paper, no edition number, etc.. I am not interested in buying this cheap copy, and I would like for my money to be refunded." This was her response: "****,As you know, auctions are final.We represented only the print. We did not state any specifics which is why it was not listed as starting at a higher price.Please know you are welcome to preview prior to the auction, but all sales are final.This piece was not misrepresented.Regards,***********" And my response back was: "I believe that this was misrepresented. I will contact *************** and the ********************** to report your behavior if you do not refund my money.I do not want this to go this way, but you have forced my hand.-****." And their response was: ****,You do what you need to do.Buyer's remorse is not an excuse not to pay. I have included **************** in the email to save you some time.Respectfully,***** ******* And my reply was: "I paid in full right away. This is NOT buyer's remorse. You were selling a ******** ********* print from a famous artist, and had set the price range estimate between ********** which matches the value of a real print. But this is a cheap photo copy. And you will not acknowledge this vital point of fact. That is why I want my money back. If you are honest, you will admit that you were wrong in not stating the fact that it was not a real ********* print, and will comply with the refund.-****." There has since been no reply, and it is clear that she does not care that she is using deceitful, unethical and misleading business practices, without ****** for honestly or ********** One look at prior ** complaints reveals that this is how she regularly does business.

  Business response

  01/05/2023

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/12/16) */ The item we sold **** was EXACTLY what he paid for. There was no unethical or misleading business practice. The item purchased was a print, and was described as such. Here is the exact description ********* ******** ******** Print of a Woman in winter Landscape - ******** Print Of Woman) If this was an original from this artist it would have cost well into the thousands, which is why we specifically did not state original. **** bid on an item without looking at it and thought he was getting a GREAT deal. When he found out that he got exactly what he paid for he was angry because we did not refund his money. The item he paid for and received is EXACTLY what we described and he received. There was a REASON the starting bid was so low. The auction platform we sold this on agreed with Clark's as they were fully informed by Clark's as to the complaint. **** does not mention that he has been buying from Clark's since 2018 and suddenly we are now unethical? 5 Years of doing business and now misleading? Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/12/20) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Yes, I have purchased from ****** before. Which is why I was upset when they refused to simply cancel the order when it became clear that the print was a cheap copy, and not representative of its listed value. I collect ******** ********* prints, and I have hundreds of them. Including several by ******* ******** And I have bought several of the authentic ********* prints from this artist for under ***** So when I saw what looked like a real ********* print with an estimated value (listed in the auction) of $3XX-XXX, it only followed that it must be a real ********* print. The value of a copy of the print would be around ******** simply for decorative and not collector purchase. Most auction houses will list the value of copied prints low, with a range, Like ******* and they will state clearly that it is a copy and not a real ********* print because the value of a copy is one-tenth the value of a real ********* print, just like a ****** ******** copy is cheaper than a real oil painting. If ******** actually believed that the copy was worth the ***** that I paid for it, then they would have simply refunded my money, and put it in their next auction. When they saw that they had drastically over estimated the value in their estimate, it should be corrected in the next auction, perhaps stating specifically that it was not an actual ********* print. Which is what I expected to happen, rather than blaming me for not guessing that it was a cheap copy with a $3XX-XXX estimated price.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩