Featured News story about antique dealer, lawsuit over African mask

Agreed. If it's Hoodwill, it's payback. If a tag sale, I make a donation somewhere.

 

But a problem could arise when, succumbing to one's moral conscience and offering the seller some compensation, the seller then indignantly wants more.

 

I believe in the case of the mask, the argument was made that the couple came to the dealer for his ability to assess the item and he swindled them on purpose. Thus, he wasn't just a buyer, he was also the appraiser, and would be commiting fraud by lying. I believe he said he was not apprasing, did not officially appraise it, and did not know the full value...it's been a minute since I read it though.

The Homer painting was a question on whether the painting had been stolen, as no one could reliably say how it got to the tip. The family claimed to have not done it themselves. Obviously there is a precedent of returning stolen works. That is still not settled.

So, there were extenuiating circumstances outside of a simple purchase. That said, could someone sue you anyway? Of course, but they may not win, and a lawyer may not want to take something on with no basis. People can lie though.

My non-lawyer advice is to not go on TV shows or do interviews about falling into these things. Same advice if you win the lotto. Obviously you can't stop Sotheby's from alerting others with their due diligence but the less eyes on your fortune the better!

 

If it's been looted, the obviously it goes home. You do have to wonder about something found at the tip though. The sellers were the finders, not the thieves as far as anyone knows. Or at least anyone can prove.

 

Yeah I don't think they were accusing the finders-family directly, and the original owners did offer then a "finders fee" of part of the sale proceeds if the auction went through. Finder family seemed to feel like the rug got pulled out from under them as this all allegedly happened the day of the auction (tv editing can always lie). I understand their feelings but you need to make these decisions (long court cases, likelihood of winning anything more than offered, consideration of the original family) clear headed.

 

If it really was stolen at some point, and insurance did NOT pay out, then you've got a problem. The original owners ought not to have lost title to it. I think under some circumstances a stolen item can become property of the insurance company who issued the policy. Then you've got a whole different problem unless the company wrote it off years ago.