The ups and downs of bovine carcasses

[Pavel]

Agree. I was wrong. Nobody stole, just like the old lady to fool. not poluchilos.Obratite account-holders are protected by law and they do not have to hide this, promotion and collectors. How narrow the circle and how seriously the reputation of dealers and connoisseurs. This allows you to twist in this environment, huge amounts.

[Meister]

Сообщение от Pavel

Please note-holders are protected by law and they do not have to hide this, promotion and collectors.

if it were so ... absolutely crazy American laws from the series (I walked, stumbled, spilling coffee on yourself, file a claim for 100 million to the person who sold me a coffee). the deal was? was. and if Sutin not risen in price, but fell in price, then the National Gallery to the dealers made a claim? say, did not say that in the future will fall in price. these dealers or to the heirs? say, we overpaid, ay-ay? absolute nonsense and sverhgranichnoe schizophrenic amerikosami understanding of the concepts of "democracy" and "law"

[Pavel]

Sorry-88000 and 1000000 for 10 years, given that Soutine has rostet in price? The same had to convince her, then, experts - like a pure fraud.

[uriart]

So much for "The Break-Up!"

[LCR]

That anyone who rubs his hands, so that the insurance companies!

For now only bought the painting - there is need to insure it for restitution: shy:

[vyadem]

LCR, or after 5 years of previous owner to call and ask if he would mind if I already selling his picture!!!: Rolleyes:

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от LCR

The heirs claim that the National Gallery has attempted to buy almost simultaneous with its sale of Ms. Shefner, and that even the price of $ 2 million was understated compared to the market price on the product Soutine, resulting in proof of the fact that at the same time, one still life Soutine was sold for $ 5 million, and a portrait - for $ 6 million. In their view, the cost of painting from the famous series of "bull carcasses" should surpass the cost of each work sold.

Jasmin, heirs saw deception prezhdney owner of the painting.

[Jasmin]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

Jasmin, heirs saw deception prezhdney owner of the picture.

No law was violated, and disgruntled that "little had" always will be ...

[sergejnowo]

here's an ambush, which can run into in a democratic society.
The legal term is called something like "purchase of goods for a fraction of its real price, knowing it, the real price of the goods.
True Story:
You eat at the insistence of his wife, at a flea market in Berlin, at a grandmother, a picture - in a beautiful landscape and the old frame, for 25 euros. The wife liked the frame, which is wonderfully suited to framing the mirror in your hallway.
All legal.
At home his wife asks you to buy soap to wash, dirty, dusty though. In pull out of the picture frame and wash, when it noticed that the frame was covered by the signature: II Shishkin. Image dried and hung on the wall.
All legal.
A month later you come countryman, uncle Vasya and his wife, the wife of his wife tells of a successful purchase. Uncle Vasya laughs and says, Shishkin mean? Well show me. Views and said ba .. exactly Shishkin and probably the original, you know how much this painting is worth?
Oh no, how many. Well, in that amount tysch as 250,000 euros.
And at that moment, when his grandfather would have believed Vasya on the floor, you get virtually under the above legal term.
But ... not caught, not a thief.
Until you have not suffered this picture to a local auction for sale. Auction do advertising through the local newspaper. And the newspaper read the grandson of my grandmother, who sold you the picture. More like a fairy tale, - grandson of the woman, my grandmother's head, his grandson to a lawyer, a lawyer with his grandson to the police.
You will now only your lawyer.
What this will end, depends largely on the judge, lawyers and greed grandmother, grandson and your spouse.

[LCR]

I am interested in the history of the following: whether eksparty provided her a list of sales, in which there was no more than 10 of the highest sales price. They are unlocked and argue that the owner has commissioned an independent examination in any auction house, which is also now rated at 1 million, but if the story incomplete list sogotvetstvuet reality, then ekpertov stigma of a serious gun.

However, even in this case I do not understand what you can accuse the museum: he just got a legal way to sell the painting with a completely clear origin.