Aspen Home Consignment

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: The painting was represented to me as a John Linnell by AHC , in the following ways, verbally and by accompanying 'supporting' documents , including a copy letter from John Linnell and by written receiptI had no other contact in regard to the painting, and relied on AHC's representation that it was painted by John LinnellHence I paid AHC $for the paintingSubsequently, on inspection by experts in London, I have been advised that the painting is not a Linnell, and is essentially worthlessThe representation by AHC that the painting was a Linnell, was falseAHC assertions re the consignee are ireleventIt is self evident that my purchase , $5000, was based on the representation of AHCI have sought and again seek to return the painting to AHC at my expense, for creditIt appears AHC are in breach of consumer and trade practice laws, in the handling of this matter Regards, [redacted]

In response to the complaint MrK filed against my storePlease note, I have been
In business since and never had any complaint of any kind filed against AHC.
AHC is a consignment store not an art gallery and only represents what our
consigners have told us about their itemsWe in turn pass that information on to
our buyersMrK was given a letter that our consigner received from their deceased parentsThe letter in question never mentioned or authenticated the paintingIt was a letter from Linnell to a friend in London asking if he could set up a meeting with a famous British author of the timeMrK fails to mention that he sent
numerous pictures to his experts in London over a year period before purchasingThey obviously in no way inhibited his purchase of the painting.
We feel MrK has "buyers remorse".
I am enclosing the last two e mails I wrote MrK stating our position.
August 13, 2013
MrK,
AHC conducts business in good faith and prices items on the apparent identity and
condition taking into account the seller's opinion of valueWe make no further
guarantee of manufacture, authenticity, genuiness, attribution or authorshipAll
sales are final which inherently assumes that the purchaser has examined an judged
the product to their own satisfactionFurthermore, it would be an extraordinary
assumption by the buyer to rely on just the readily apparent identification an value,
without performing due diligence or research on articles, when the seller has no
notable expertise nor claims expertise, in anything other than marketing (caveat
emptor).
I feel this statement clarifies the role and position of AHCAugust 22, 2013
MrK,
You had a full year from the time you began looking at the painting, until purchase to get an appraisalYou chose not toInstead you chose to take the painting to England and have it appraised three years later.
Once again as we previously stated, we sold you the oil painting in good faith and
stand by it.
Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Della Pegolotti

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: AHC's assertion that I forwarded photos of the painting to experts, are falseMy position is that AHC misrepresented the painting as a John Linnell, verbally, by 'supporting' documents and by written receiptBased on these representations, I paid $for the painting, which I am subsequently advised is not a Linnell and of little or no valueI seek to return the painting at my expense, for a full creditI am advised that the actions of AHC are in breach of consumer and trade practice laws, and that the resolution to this matter is for AHC to accept the painting back for credit
Regards,
*** ***

In response to the complaint MrK filed against my storePlease note, I have been In business since and never had any complaint of any kind filed against AHC.
AHC is a consignment store not an art gallery and only represents what our consigners have told us
about their itemsWe in turn pass that information on to our buyersMrK was given a letter that our consigner received from their deceased parentsThe letter in question never mentioned or authenticated the paintingIt was a letter from Linnell to a friend in London asking if he could set up a meeting with a famous British author of the timeMrK fails to mention that he sent numerous pictures to his experts in London over a year period before purchasing. They obviously in no way inhibited his purchase of the painting.
We feel MrK has "buyers remorse".
I am enclosing the last two e mails I wrote MrK stating our position.
August 13, 2013
MrK,
AHC conducts business in good faith and prices items on the apparent identity and condition taking into account the seller's opinion of valueWe make no further guarantee of manufacture, authenticity, genuiness, attribution or authorshipAll sales are final which inherently assumes that the purchaser has examined an judged the product to their own satisfactionFurthermore, it would be an extraordinary assumption by the buyer to rely on just the readily apparent identification an value, without performing due diligence or research on articles, when the seller has no notable expertise nor claims expertise, in anything other than marketing (caveat emptor).
I feel this statement clarifies the role and position of AHC.
August 22, 2013
MrK,
You had a full year from the time you began looking at the painting, until purchase to get an appraisalYou chose not toInstead you chose to take the painting to England and have it appraised three years later.
Once again as we previously stated, we sold you the oil painting in good faith and stand by it.
Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Della Pegolotti

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The painting was represented to me as a John Linnell by AHC , in the following ways, verbally and by accompanying 'supporting' documents , including a copy letter from John Linnell and by written receipt. I had no other contact in regard to the painting, and relied on AHC's representation that it was painted by John Linnell. Hence I paid AHC $5000 for the painting. Subsequently, on inspection by experts in London, I have been advised that the painting is not a Linnell, and is essentially worthless. The representation by AHC that the painting was a Linnell, was false. AHC assertions re the consignee are irelevent. It is self evident that my purchase , $5000, was based on the false representation of AHC. I have sought and again seek to return the painting to AHC at my expense, for credit. It appears AHC are in breach of consumer and trade practice laws, in the handling of this matter.
Regards,
[redacted]