Another scandal in the antique market

[Art-Galera]

Hmmm.
just time to close the topic.
if people here have welcomed, frustrating to only one subject.
In any case, the sections more relevant to the art they are not particularly interested.
and how not tired of it all one and the same writing.
read - just tired.
I think, not just me.

[манна]

Сообщение от khmelev

did not understand in this thread.
If a person puts things on the auction, and then dies without having received the money and unsold items, then surely it must do his heirs entered into inheritance. No proxy is not valid after the death of the principal. And the will, and verbal instructions do not work.
  It's all so simple law prescribes that there is no point in the discussions ...
Indeed, in these publications clearly lies a double meaning.

Totally agree with you. With TZ the law, it's simple. This is the case when you do not have to be a lawyer.

1.All the power of attorney (including notariallno certified), receipts, etc. with the death of the principal forfeited.

2.Gde books are stored in whose library it does not matter.

3. It is important to point out only the deliverer for auction. If the 1st wife, she and obliged, by law, the auction house to pay the money. And then, let's wife sued (and not the police!) And through the courts decide (regardless of where it was stored) is the property inheritance go there. If the inheritance - that there are many subtleties: marital, bought the general money, etc. The court must decide relying%of each of the parties.

4.If the auction contract with the first wife - he is innocent.
 
If a receipt or oral request, then yes ... broken the law, had no right to anyone to pay money (in connection with the death of the principal), for the sale of books, until one of the wives (or both lobes in%) did not bring the paper to join the legacy Notary (with the settlement agreement) or a court order for shares of inheritance (in the dispute).

From the text Burmistrov is not clear what was the reason of payment aukts.domom money - receipt or contract with his first wife (Burmistrov quite dull wrote ... no clarity). This is the essence and, accordingly, no wine or auction house.

Сообщение от Konstantin; 2705121"

is a receipt, certified hand Igor Semenovich Gorbatova that all the books that participated in the auction, kept in the house of his first wife, and were transported from its library (by the way, he got divorced with her 15 years ago, and only a year ago, the check, please information) have a contract with Elena Dmitrievna Gorbatova, there are vouchers to transfer her money under the contract.

It's simple .... with TZ Law ..... One caveat - it is necessary to prove (in court) that the auction house knew about the death of the principal, (if the money is issued on the receipt) ... ie broke the law ...

[AlexSpb]

Yes, Burmistrov wrote somewhat vague, but the most important thing is written quite clearly:

has a contract with Elena Dmitrievna Gorbatova

There is no doubt that a contract has actually. How not to doubt that the other side will argue that he has already made up, so to speak, after the fact.
In principle, this situation is more familiar with the dense Soviet times, each an experienced notary. When he was called to the house for the drafting and notarization of the will and impose: not yet had time to cool off the dead corpse of the testator, he signed the form with the text of the will and a solid wad of money. Likely to be caught in something - almost none!

But, for me, so in favor of the legitimacy of the contract says that consideration is that why would the first wife to part with the books are stored in her home if she knew that there was nothing to it for it is not allowed?

What to expect in such a case, the opponents?
Do not feel like reading tea leaves, but, in my opinion, everything is understandable:
Their goal - using the material concerned anonymous "well-wishers" to create a buzz in the media and, threatening worn on the courts, to force the current owners of money to compromise and give up some part of them - at least 25 percent of the total.

[Fed]

And therefore filed, as I see it, the statement to the police is likely a fraud.
Since I think the laws of the Russian Federation have gone far from the Ukrainian, and a side of "no money" wants to understand why the alleged testament spared the child from the 2nd wife. Even if there is some chit-will, or some oral statements.

And then, the contract with 1st wife, the "where books were kept," is very lucky for her. I've seen 2-w. understand what it means to be "stored" and who was the owner.
A court is not to decide, so the police came.

P.S. I wish that all were allowed to peacefully. But these strange stories happen, and with such a seemingly decent people and deserved that anything would not be surprised. And when the proceedings are opened ulterior motives.
By the way, from the beginning it did look slander, but on reflection you can come to the conclusion that this event in an attempt to understand the legal aspects of the situation. Since each of the parties, their opinion of what happened to the rule of law.
Therefore, intimidation of "libel" does not pass the proceedings.

I think "2nd child" may shake their share. Especially not without lawyers she works.

[Vladimir]

http://www.compromat.ru/page_33659.htm

The answer Sergei Burmistrov

The publication of "The Book as a source of money"

To the Editor Kompromat.Ru

Dear Editor!

I am writing to you in regard to the material, "The book as a source of money", published on your website August 8, 2013 and submitted the information that "the auctioneer Sergei Burmistrov deceived family well known art collector for $ 4 million." I bring to your attention that the facts contained in the published material does not correspond to the actual state of affairs.

If your obstruct journalists themselves represented in the analysis of the case, I can tell you that appearing in your publication 4 million were paid on the basis of financial documents and concluded contract number 400 of February 19, 2013 Gorbatova Elena Dmitrievna, which is the owner of these books. As for the hereditary claims, the "House of antique books in Nikitsky" is not a government agency decision makers on these issues. The contract was executed in full.

Professional issues regarding the antiquarian book trade, the set of such issues, including the sale of books from the pre-revolutionary books of stamps and stamped the disbanded Soviet libraries are ambiguous and regulatory framework currently in Russia do not have. From his views on this question, I do not refuse, but the quotes from my interviews on the site, you need to be considered in the overall context of the issues discussed in them. As for the charges me to trade in stolen goods, fraud and other criminal acts, we bring to your notice that the criminal and administrative charges have never been brought and claims on these issues did not receive.

I ask you, if necessary, to verify the above facts and publish this letter on your internet site.

Sincerely,
Sergei Burmistrov
General Director of "House of antique books in Nikitsky"
Vice-president of the Guild of Antiquaries-scribes
Expert of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation

knigoved@yandex.ru