General Forum

I recently came across an auction house web site, in which their rules regarding autographed lots went along the lines of: 

- Use the photos we provide to make judgment on authenticity before bidding.

- After winning a lot, if you believe autographs are not authentic, you must provide a third-party rejection letter within 30 days, and return the items back to us.

- We might consult with a third-party authenticator of our own to settle any dispute.

It also mentions that if a lot does not come with a COA, the bidder basically has to take the auctioneers word for it’s authenticity.

Shouldn’t the authentication be the job of the auctioneers if there is no COA, or at least not state the items are 100% authentic if there is no documentation?

Why list an item if you can’t prove it’s auto is legit?

Would YOU bid on an signed piece unsure if the sig is real, and knowing all the possible hassles ahead?

It is too good to be true, it probably is. Maybe they just want to protect themselves, but not a good way to boost buyer's confidence. As you said, one has the right to expect that a reputable auction house will check authenticity from what they sell and proof it upon request. Fine arts auctions have people to verify tracability, car auctions will verify if the titles are clear and so on. From the description you give, they look more like someone in the business for profit before everything else.