For years, when we (and everyone else) only held live auctions, there were often one or two somewhat infamous bidders who attempted — and sometimes succeeded — to intimidate other bidders. What was the game? To try to get the other bidder to stop bidding.
For instance, these players would loudly raise the bid above the asking price and/or get right up in the face of another bidder. The message was typically, “There’s no reason to keep bidding … I’m buying this item.” Oftentimes, this technique would work against a less seasoned “opponent.”
One particular bidder in our immediate marketplace for years would proudly hold his thumb up in the air to suggest his bidding would not stop, so you “might as well.” Some experienced bidders would sometimes take advantage of the “thumb” and bid higher than they would have otherwise.
Is this type of bidder violating the law? Is this type of bidder taking on any additional risk? Could one argue “tortious interference?” Maybe, or maybe not. We previously wrote about this issue here: https://mikebrandlyauctioneer.wordpress.com/2020/08/31/contractual-tortious-interference/.
Tort law involves — generally — reasonable behavior between parties lacking any particular contract between the two and remedies when one party injures another. We suspect a bidder could argue “tortious interference” when another bidder interferes with their contracting to purchase this same item.
So far as during a live (or online auction), a tortious interference claim seems like a heavy lift, as auctions are inherently competitive and bidders should expect a certain amount of fierce behavior between bidders especially when the subject property is in high demand. Yet, it seems possible some overt behavior might rise to intentional interference in others’ contracting.
Auctioneers can mitigate this type of behavior and we’ve done just that during both live and online auctions, communicating to the “other bidder” that “everything is fine, and you can certainly bid again …” Of course, it’s an auctioneer’s job to advocate for the seller (client) by encouraging bidders to bid.
Speaking of advocating for the seller/client, bidders are necessary for there to be bidding. Creating policies that discourage bidding injures the seller accordingly. Many auctioneers suffer from the “protect the seller/auctioneer syndrome” which can then result in bidders not responding, thus countering the “protect the seller” goal.
Mike Brandly, Auctioneer, CAI, CAS, AARE has been an auctioneer and certified appraiser for over 30 years. His company’s auctions are located at: Mike Brandly, Auctioneer and Goodwill Columbus Car Auction. He serves as Distinguished Faculty at Hondros College, Executive Director of The Ohio Auction School, and an Instructor at the National Auctioneers Association’s Designation Academy and Western College of Auctioneering. He is faculty at the Certified Auctioneers Institute held at Indiana University and is approved by The Supreme Court of Ohio for attorney education.
Comments