If the auctioneer is bidding on behalf of the Seller, such as to protect a minimum reserve price, then such bidding must be disclosed to the buyers. If the auctioneer does not disclose that he/she is bidding on behalf of the Seller, then it is considered shilling and that is illegal.

Now, I must also note from my own experience, most folks don’t pay close attention to the opening announcements or make the effort to read the terms and conditions of the sale. So, if the auctioneer made an announcement at the beginning of the auction, stating that they reserve the right to bid on behalf of reserved minimums (i.e. the Seller), that is all that is required. Keep in mind, it is irrelevant, whether you were even present at the beginning when the opening announcements were made… when you bid, you are still subject to any statements made, whether you knew about them or not.

First, the UCC is a “guide”, which was used by most states, in drafting their own laws. You may need to refer to your state laws for specifics, as some states may have variations and sometimes more stringent rules. But, for the sake of this discussion, we’ll stick to the basics outlined by the UCC.

Now, we must also understand that the UCC section regarding auctions, is only targeting the basics of auction conduct. There are also laws governing contracts and this can make things a little ambiguous, without knowing the exact wording of the contract you signed. But, once again, I’ll assume that it was written as you have interpreted.

The contract you signed, guarantees the obligations of both parties. So, if it states that the item can not be sold below a minimum amount, then the auctioneer has violated the contract and can be held liable. So, it would be assumed that the auctioneer owes you the full amount due, as if the item was sold at the minimum reserved amount.

Can you get your item back, if it didn’t sell at the reserve? Yes and No. Technically, the contract with the buyer was not in good faith and you may be able to recover your property. Then the buyer may have a case against the auctioneer for a violation of contract. However, in either case, someone is looking at a lawsuit, in order to get satisfaction. By the same token, the buyer may not willingly give up the item… and regardless of whether the auctioneer or the seller returns their money, so this could still be a matter for a judge to decide (I think this auctioneer is going to be in a lot of trouble, either way).

The best resolution, would be for the auctioneer to pay you for your item, based on the reserved minimum. If he/she is not willing to do so, then you will likely need the services of a lawyer, which will first send a letter demanding payment and then take further action, if necessary.

If you are just wanting to get your item back, then you may ask the auctioneer to contact the buyer and request it to be returned. If the buyer refuses, you will still need that lawyer. However, your contract is with the auctioneer and the auctioneer has made a contract with the buyer… it could be a long, drawn out, messy situation. In most cases, if the auctioneer is willing to pay you what should have been owed, it will be the easiest resolution to the problem.

Hopefully, this was just an “honest” mistake, with no ill intent by the auctioneer. If he/she is willing to pay the amount owed, then they are at least, trying to make things right and that’s all anyone can be expected to do.

If he/she was reluctant to make things right, then I would take any action necessary to insure I was properly compensated or my property returned. Then again, that’s just me… I tend to let my principles lead me, sometimes… even if it costs me more money.

Sorry for offtopic

The UCC says “A sale by auction is complete when the auctioneer so announces by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner.”, also saying, “Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale.”

If personal property is consigned for auction and the Consignment Contract states a reserve, and the highest bid never reaches the reserve, can the auctioneer hammer the goods ‘sold’ to the high bidder anyway and transfer legal title for the property to the buyer despite a consignment contract which makes no provisions for doing so?

While the UCC states “a sale is complete when the auctioneer so announces”, does the auctioneer declaring ‘sold’ beneath the contract reserve price abrogate the consigning seller’s prior existing contract reserve terms with the auctioneer and transfer the consignor’s title to the property in question to the buyer, despite failing to meet the reserve?

Does the auctioneer’s fiduciary duty to the seller and the consignment contract terms disappear with the hammer’s declaration of ‘sold’ or nullify the consignor’s inherent title and rights to their consigned property when the reserve price is not met?

Assume the auctioneer ‘mistakenly’ fails to bid up to the reserve and fails to withdraw the lot on behalf of the seller when the reserve is not met, and instead, declares the property sold to the highest bidder under the reserve price, can/must the auctioneer, on recognizing that the ‘sale’ failed to meet the consignor’s reserve, act to cancel the sale and return possession of the property to the consignor if the consignor demands it?

Under the same conditions above, can the auctioneer refuse to cancel the sale on the grounds that under the UCC he can not reverse or cancel a sale once he hammers ‘sold’ as his defense for failing to act on the consignor’s behalf to prevent the property from leaving his possession, or later act to recover the property ‘sold’ from the buyer?

Under the same conditions above, does the buyer actually have good legal title to the property sold?

Does the UCC specifically say any auction sale must first be in compliance with the consignor’s contract with the auctioneer (i.e. at or above the reserve price) to be a valid sale before transferring title to an acknowledged buyer? Or, is the auctioneer’s power to sell arbitrary and entirely at their discretion? (I would have thought the UCC’s conception of the auctioneer’s hammer of ‘sold’ being the last word was presumed to mark a sale that was already in compliance with the prior agreed terms of consignment, not in spite of them. That the hammer does not negate the contract that went before it.)

An auctioneer’s fiduciary duty is to act on behalf of the seller in accordance with the consignment contract and other disclosed terms. Typically the better part of the auctioneer’s revenue comes from the commission buyer’s pay. If the auctioneer fails to act on the consignor’s behalf during the auction to enforce the reserve before he hammer’s ‘sold’ and sells the consignor’s personal property at a price under the reserve price, could it be construed that the auctioneer is acting out of a clear conflict of interest in that he is manufacturing a sale in defiance of his obligations under the previously arranged consignment contract’s terms in order to benefit at his consignor’s expense?

If you need more detail I have it.

Does the auctioneer’s offer to pay the difference between the actual sale price and the stated reserve in any way compensate

While the lure of an auction often brings people hoping to get a steal of a deal, this is not the intent of an auction. The actual intent is to bring “market value” as determined by a reasonable market and interested bidders.

Now, to help you understand the other matters behind a lien (levied) sale of property.

When a property goes under foreclosure due to any kind of lien, most states have laws limiting your ownership rights for a period of time, although there are a few states that may give you outright ownership. In any case, the lien amount is what the taxing authority is seeking to get reimbursed, or in the case of a lender, what is owed on the loan. Any amount over the lien/foreclosure amount is still owed to the property owner. After all, it IS their property and they would still hope to get market value. Once their lien is paid, they would still like to get what is left of their equity in the property.

So, to sum it up, the auctioneer is striving to get the highest bid and will also strive to get the highest starting bid, in an effort to get the job done quickly. Of course, there’s a saying in the business… “It’s not where it starts. It’s where it ends, that counts”. So, if it starts too low, it just means that it will take a lot longer to get to its potential value and just wastes a lot of time and effort, for the bidders, as well as the auctioneer.

It’s always best to do your homework (due diligence) prior to an auction, as well as know what you are willing to pay. Too many people waste a lot of time and effort chasing all over, in the hopes of getting a steal, when most property typically brings its true value.

So, while Oregon doesn’t currently have an Auctioneer licensing requirement, you might want to do some additional research on the other laws. It is always recommended that you enroll in one of the Auctioneer Training schools, as well.

Here are some additional links on Oregon laws and auctions, just for starters:
http://www.oregonauctioneers.org/reference.php
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/698.html
http://www.oregon.gov/
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/
http://licenseinfo.oregon.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=license_seng&link_item_id=13881
http://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/BoatLaws/salvageboats.shtml
http://www.foreclosurelaw.org/Oregon_Foreclosure_Law.htm

These are just a few of the various laws that can effect an auctioneer in the State of Oregon, even though they don’t have an Auctioneer Licensing law. Of course, there may be other business licensing or regulations that may also apply.

Now, in answering your last question. I am not an attorney, nor do I currently practice auctioneering in Oregon. This website is for general information purposes relating to auctions and a result of my own research, but I don’t guarantee complete accuracy, although I try to offer as much as I can find without overwhelming time consuming efforts. Individual and/or Private efforts in assisting you to obtain additional in-depth information would only be considered on a fee based arrangement… of course, being an auctioneer, the arrangement would be full of stipulations, such “As-Is, Where-Is, No Warranties or Guarantees Expressed or Implied” and my efforts would only be considered a research service to locate additional information you might need.

So, as I indicated previously, you might want to enroll in one of the auction schools, first. Then, if you still need assistance in determining additional requirements, you can contact me for my terms and fees.

I would recommend going to the Florida State website and start searching for the laws or talk to a lawyer.