BRYN MAWR, PENN. – Following the publication of an article relating to fraud charges lodged in a civil action complaint against a Pennsylvania auction house that appeared in the December 30, 2005, issue of Antiques and The Arts Weekly, auctioneer and defendant in the case, Russell Pritchard III of Bryn Mawr Auctions LLC, has responded with allegations of his own. The complaint against Pritchard, filed on December 14, in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on behalf of Sandra Udinson, a 59-year-old widow from Doylestown, Penn., alleges, among other things, “fraud,” “unfair trade practices,” “breach of contract” and “professional negligence.”

In a released statement from Pritchard’s attorney, Craig Kellerman of Kellerman & Connelly, PC, allegations are being denied and additional legal action on the auction firm’s behalf has been suggested.

“Russ Pritchard of Bryn Mawr Auction Company, LLC has asserted his complete lack of wrongdoing and will vigorously defend himself against the false accusations by Sandra Udinson as reported in the recent edition of Antiques and The Arts Weekly,” the release from Kellerman states. “Mr Pritchard intends to bring all appropriate legal action against Mrs Udinson for her false and misleading claims concerning the auction of her items conducted by the Bryn Mawr Auction Company, LLC.”

Allegations specifically addressed by Pritchard in the Udinson complaint include reserves on items sold that the plaintiff claims were contracted, yet were never set prior to the items having been sold. Pritchard, in a November 3, 2005, letter to Udinson’s attorney, Gavin Lentz, of the Philadelphia law firm Bochetto & Lentz, PC, denies that reserves were requested.

The lack of reserves allegedly resulted in some items selling far below their worth, according to the plaintiff. The December article quoted Udinson discussing a “walnut Chippendale highboy that was valued at $8,517, and a cherry Chippendale highboy appraised at $5,678 during an insurance appraisal in 2000. ‘He told me that auction didn’t go well and that he got $900 for one of my highboys from a bidder on eBay and $1,100 for the other,’ stated Udinson.”

Pritchard stated in the November letter to Lentz that the highboys had been evaluated by two Bryn Mawr Auction employees with considerable knowledge and experience in the antiques field and that each had pointed out, on separate occasions, “condition and restoration problems in Mrs Udinson’s property.” The letter specifically cites “the two tall high chests that had been completely refinished with new feet, new bases, new drawer interiors and one of the chests actually had four new drawer fronts.”

Pritchard further stated in the November letter that he had spoken to both representatives of the gallery and they confirmed that “at no time did Mrs Udinson indicate she wanted a reserve on her property, nor would they have accepted one because of the average value of her pieces and the restoration work to the furniture.”

Kellerman further stated, “There is a written, signed contract between all parties involved and nowhere in that contract is there any indication that there were reserves to be placed on any of those items.”

Lentz disputed the recent claims by Pritchard and Kellerman, stating, “She wanted to set a minimum reserve and he absolutely violated her rights by not letting her set that reserve.”

Antiques and The Arts Weekly sought comments from Pritchard for the December 30 article, however, none of the calls were returned prior to publication. Information contained in this article was submitted by Russell Pritchard III and Attorney Craig Kellerman on January 5.