Thanks: 0
Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 16 to 30 of 32
-
8th April 2013, 02:32 PM #16
Devil's Advocate
Ok, so what would happen if the vendor puts a Romalpa clause on the invoice which accompanies the goods, but the buyer rejects that when he sees it? In other words "I didn't know that was going to be on there and i rejected those terms", then goes belly up before the goods have been sent back (which is what I would presume should happen when a buyer rejects the terms).
-
8th April 2013 02:32 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
8th April 2013, 08:34 PM #17GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- bilpin
- Posts
- 3,559
In the timber trade that has always been a standard part of the contract.
Usually simplified to read: "Goods remain property of vendor pending full payment."
-
8th April 2013, 09:20 PM #18Hammer Head
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Sydney
- Posts
- 1,205
sounds to me like tha guy at weithril park was owed money too from the botany guy and has made up the storey to keep this stuff to try to get some money back,
its got me stuffed who is involved in this but good chances are the weithrill park place does timber milling.
-
9th April 2013, 08:41 AM #19GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Location
- Sydney
- Age
- 74
- Posts
- 1,389
joys of business
There comes a time in business, when further action is not worth the angst or trouble and it is best to put it down to experience.
Mal has written this off as a 'hit' as he is not fussed to waste any more time chasing goods which are not really traceable as one piece of timber looks like another.
Thanks for all your thoughts, just means he will have to work a little smarter in future. COD is great!
Greg
-
9th April 2013, 10:34 AM #20
I know the feeling Greg, Gives me the ##### every time it happens.
"We must never become callous. When we experience the conflicts ever more deeply we are living in truth. The quiet conscience is an invention of the devil." - Albert Schweizer
My blog. http://theupanddownblog.blogspot.com
-
9th April 2013, 10:47 AM #21GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- bilpin
- Posts
- 3,559
Greg,
I understand your logic. One can waste a lot of time trying to track the untrackable.
Just a thought.... If the wetherill park company can't produce documents of transport, the buck stops with them. For these documents to be complete, they must show proof of receipt.
-
11th April 2013, 12:36 PM #22
Off topic
This reminds me of when my bro got divorced. A few years ago.
The locals gals were telling his missus to go him 60/40.
He said fair enough we'll get solicitors involved and you may get 60 but it will only be the same $ as 40 after those blood sucking x!z?!! get paid.
She was smart enough to twig and they parted friends and he fixed the wiring on her new house and now she and his new girlfriend are looking out for him.
He's got Parkinson's.
H.Jimcracks for the rich and/or wealthy. (aka GKB '88)
-
11th April 2013, 01:49 PM #23SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- St George area, Sydney
- Age
- 65
- Posts
- 640
-
12th April 2013, 04:19 PM #24Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- Sydney
- Posts
- 108
Retention of title clauses are now classified as security interests under the PPSA. Accordingly, they must be perfected (registered) in order to retain priority in the event of various things (like liquidation or sale to a third party for value without notice). If the registration is accompanied by a statement to the effect that the interest is a "purchase money security interest", it will gain priority over other registered interests (although there are exceptions).
The PPSA is still fairly new so practitioners and the industry are adapting - but note that simple retention of title clauses are not necessarily sufficient to protect interests anymore.
-
12th April 2013, 10:52 PM #25GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- bilpin
- Posts
- 3,559
If you haven't paid for it, you don't own it. It's that simple.
-
13th April 2013, 09:19 AM #26Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- Sydney
- Posts
- 108
It's not that simple. Ownership passes with title. Title doesn't necessarily pass with payment. In any case, even where title hasn't passed, the goods vest in the company for distribution on liquidation where they are in possession. Other problems arise when the goods have been transferred to a third party.
Hence why retention of title clauses exist. Although my point above is that with the ppsa, they should be registered as security interests.
-
13th April 2013, 09:32 PM #27GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- bilpin
- Posts
- 3,559
Many are the bolsters that have been picked up through lack of payment.
Good remain the property of the vendor until paid for. Or is just unique to the wholesale timber trade?
-
13th April 2013, 10:47 PM #28Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- Sydney
- Posts
- 108
That people continue to believe this sort of thing is part of the reason why they, and others, don't adequately secure their interests. The rights of a liquidator are strong. Unsecured interests are weak. For those of you who know of jacksons rare guitars in Sydney - it went under recently with 1M in guitars held that were on consignment - none had been registered. The consignors were extremely lucky and managed to get their guitars back - after many legal opinions were drafted.
There are countless other examples of people who were not so lucky. Now that the.ppsa is in force, and many people are not aware of it, there will be countless more clogging up the courts. So for anyone drafting supply contracts who might be reading this - register your security interests. Retention clauses are no longer enough nor is relying on basic contractual right such as breach for failure to pay.
-
14th April 2013, 02:56 AM #29Deceased
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- ...
- Posts
- 7,955
Generally yes, but NOT in a case of a company going into receivership and/or liquidation because the law says otherwise.
Also if a person supplies goods to a builder (in this case timber) and the builder uses it in construction of a building and then fails to pay for it, it's illegal for the supplier to enter the building site and remove his goods. All he can do is sue for payment in the courts.
Maybe stupid, maybe abnormal to normal people but that's the way our wonderful laws are. Blame the politicians who made these laws.
Peter.
-
14th April 2013, 11:40 AM #30GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
- bilpin
- Posts
- 3,559
Were they lucky to get their guitars back, or was it how they went about it?
Your comment about registering consignments is very good advice.
The practice of ordering prior to liquidation has been a common one for many years. Particularly in the case of exotic timber. It is good to know that, at last, facilities have been provided which enable suppliers some recourse.
Hopefully it is not just another toothless tiger or money spinner.
Similar Threads
-
Theft in Moe (VIC)
By shedbound in forum ANNOUNCEMENTSReplies: 0Last Post: 11th January 2013, 06:58 PM -
The joys of owning your own business
By Grumpy John in forum WOODIES JOKESReplies: 2Last Post: 20th July 2009, 11:03 PM -
Timber business (Merbau, Rosewood)
By ivanwu in forum Links to: TIMBER & HARDWARE SUPPPLIERSReplies: 7Last Post: 9th November 2005, 12:43 PM -
Timber business (Merbau, Rosewood)
By ivanwu in forum TIMBERReplies: 0Last Post: 27th September 2004, 01:24 PM