• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Stay away from tvrsales on ebay

Stay away from tvrsales on ebay

  • I'm grabbing all I can afford.

    Votes: 9 31.0%
  • I'm staying out of this.

    Votes: 20 69.0%

  • Total voters
    29
I want to publicly thank Sellman for organizing the first VCF festivals. I personally attended VCF 1.0 in the bay and I still the have the t-shirt. I also remember the ridicule I received from an engineer/good friend who told me "nobody cares about 8 bit computers anymore.". Many years later, the record speaks for itself.

Were I Sellman, I'm sure I may have chosen to handle this differently. But I'm not and the history books are still being written. I sincerely hope this episode reaches satisfactory resolution for everyone involved. In the meantime, I'm personally chosing not to bid on any ebay items that may be in dispute by parties.

Geoff
 
lol, his name is Sellam, although maybe he'll like the Freudian name you gave him better.
 
tvrsales, tvrsales2, tvrsales3, ...

tvrsales, tvrsales2, tvrsales3, ...

one of the non-profit museums might move in to request to take the stuff and give tax credit in lieu of payment but to keep the equipment safe.

They have already made MUCH more than what was owed (and rejected by the landlord)
I hope Sellam is keeping a tally of what tvrsales in all of their eBay aliases has made off this.

Someone on the inside clearly knows what is worth money. The sad thing is it appears they consider software and documentation to be 'worthless'
and aren't even bothering to list it. It is probably already in the landfill.
 
Most people toss software instead of ebaying it unfortunatly, and not that many people seem to collect it. How do you prove the equipment was yours anyway? Even with serial numbers you would have to contact each buyer and verify each one who would bother doing that?

Guess I need to start recording serial numbers.
 
Although there are similarities, the landlord is the same as an ordinary debt collector. If the collector comes knocking and you present to him what he claims you owe him in cash or in other good funds, the collector would be foolish to refuse to take it. If he refused, then you should be able to convince a court to avoid further award of interest and penalties. On the other hand, if you gave him an personal or business check for a large amount and the collector refused to take it, that may be another issue, especially if you have a history of bouncing checks.

But the landlord is in a different situation. If you have been in default of your rent, he has the right to evict you, even if you later come up with every penny of the back rent and other charges. Eviction does not wipe away the debt of the rent owed. Sometimes leases include grace and cure periods, and in residential leases state law may provide protection against a landlord seeking to use a single late rent payment as a pretext to evict.

So suppose you come to the landlord and say here is everything I owe you, will you allow me X number of days to remove my property? The landlord would be within his rights to demand the amount for those days you need. But if you have a history of not being able to keep to your promises about moving out, he may refuse.

So the problem becomes his premises, your property. One remedy would be to bring a tort action, suing for the value of any property converted by the landlord over and above what you owe and seek the equitable remedy of replevin to have the court order the property restored to you. If the property is unique and irreplaceable, you may be well-advised to seek a temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction against the landlord to stop any further sales. This may not be possible if there is an outstanding amount and the landlord is selling pursuant to a judgment and execution.
 
Whether he should or should not have been evicted is not in dispute. The issue is whether the landlord complied with state an local laws concerning giving a tenant proper notice before formal eviction and seizure of contents. ie. Whether it was a lawful eviction.

I've heard Sellam's side. I haven't heard the land lord's side. There are always two. No one including Sellam has provided any update on pending legal action in the dispute. Until a court jurisdiction in California says otherwise, and regardless of Sellam's claims, the current status status of the property is NOT stolen. No one can be charged in any jurisdiction of receiving or possession of stolen property because it currently isn't stolen. If Sellam's legal dispute is resolved in his favor against TVR, he certainly has a basis for civil action against TVR and possibly the buyers. However any suits against buyers must be handled individually and in each jurisdiction of the buyer.

That's why it's important he give us more information, and why it's disappointing he not.
 
Back
Top