Leaderboard

Scotland under the SNP

I wish I'd thought of the question myself, as with hindsight it's bleedin' obvious. Sturgeon has long been showing her admiration for anything not English or better still anti-English. A bad case of my enemy's enemy being my best friend IMO.

No. No, they haven't. Oh all right. You want me to look it up, right?

Speaking as a collector, or NPME (non-profit making entity), I do, wherever possible, try to obtain coins with a provenance. I find it important that a coin that I want to keep has some extrinsic baggage, a life story if you will, and I would pay more for that. I'm sure that we'd all like to own unique coins, well I like to think that, to some extent, a provenance gives you that. For each coin, I like to compile a file of information containing not only the physical specifications and historical details of the piece but also the tickets, auction catalogues, and any information that I can find relating to previous custodians. I do not then have generic examples of such-and-such a coin or medal, but examples with unique alter ego's, thanks to their provenance. A provenance can give an unobtrusive cookie-cutter coin a unique aspect. Of course, there are provenances and there are PROVENANCES and that's another interesting discussion. I suppose you're either into it or you're not, as the actress said to the bishop. Here's a recent example. I'd been looking for a Lilburn acquittal medal for a while and I passed on a better looking (and cheaper) example to select the one below. I chose it above the better grade for its interesting, albeit tenuous, non-numismatic provenance.

Ignoring the delicate aspects of contract law, the problem you're going to have is that you have no damages if you immediately receive a refund. You'd have to sue for specific performance of the contract. But this is entirely up to the discretion of the court, and they almost certainly would find demanding specific performance unreasonable under the circumstances. There's a lot of precedent for specific performance as a remedy in the case of land sales where one party backs out, but in this situation, where the seller did not intend to offer the item at the price, the buyer would be treated by the court as acting in bad faith, and the "unclean hands" doctrine would prevent them from obtaining specific performance. If the seller meant to ludicrously overprice the item, then it would be more complex - but in the case of a coin obviously worth £1250 offered for £125, I think you wouldn't get anywhere at all. Which is how it should be really !

JLS, do you have any other info on the Clarks Patent Lamps token? I'm considering selling a rather good one but can't find anything about them.

I remember buying a suit from a well known departmental store. The site stated that stock is low and there were two available at that size. I placed the order, paid (and money has been taken out of my credit card) and have got multiple e-mail confirmations. One giving me the date I can pick it up from the store. Then I got an e-mail that the order is delayed and eventually not available and my money will be refunded. Obviously, they are liable if there had been a contract. But I have no doubt that their T&C (which of course I couldn't be bothered to read) would have stated that contract is only binding on delivery.

I agree- it is strange that the CA say that 'You' should have noticed- well of course you have, by trying to buy the item at the ridiculously low price! So, if you were asked whether you HAD noticed, it would be a bit tricky to claim that to you, buying something for £125 when it's clearly a £1250 value happens so often that you don't get an alarm bell ringing upon seeing the ad.....