[ QUOTE ]
Point taken, but has BJ ever done an unwind? Especially in a high profile case like this? I have no doubt they have the lawyers in place to do it, but has it ever happened? And what about the seller, Gary has "Officially retracted" his statement, so where does that place the seller in litigation wanting his due from BJ? I don't think law enforcement even comes into play now. He presented it, BJ promoted it, someone bought it, who pays? The way I see it is, after Gary retracted, it becomes a viable deal, someone bought the car and someone has to pay for it. I can't see the seller taking the car back and even remotely thinking about paying BJ 18% with Gary retracting, so where does it go from here? I know it's a mess and not right, but I also think that someone's coughing up the money to make it go away. Who has the most to lose here? My guess is BJ, that's all.
[/ QUOTE ]
BJ is just the vehicle to sell the car...that's all. They are in business to offer a place to sell a car...that's it...end of story.
The seller bears the responsibility for the claims made and the representations that he made about the car...whether true or not.
With the amount of pictures that are out on the internet on this particular car...or pieces of it...it makes no difference as to whether "Gary" retracted or not.
Buyers and sellers have to sign a contract with BJ and all of this stuff is outlined in the contract. So if they take the time to read the contract (which they should) they will realize thar BJ is free and clear. Should BJ act to rectify the situation? I think so...but it's their choice as to what to do. They know WAY more about this type of stuff than I do!
From what I know...deals have been unwound at quite a few auctions...including BJ.
Like a really wise man once told me....
"It is what it is".
