The case of Steamboat Willy’s ticket involves fraud since identifying the value of different items by third parties should be based on honesty and genuine opinions. According to Tennant (2020), professional valuers, including antique dealers, “may only give valuations which are in accordance with their honest opinion as to the value of the item valued” (p. 3). Therefore, Fred Sandford of Sandford and Sons was not supposed to give Steamboat Willy an incorrect valuation of his ticket and postcards from Gilligan since it was different from his genuine opinion, thereby dishonest. The act of a professional valuer giving a dishonest opinion amounts to criminal fraud, leaving them liable to prosecution. In the case under discussion, Fred Sanford did not give any reasonable explanations for his lies: he only claimed that he did not take access to information from Steamboat Willy. However, it still implies that the antique dealer, who presented himself as a professional valuer, gave the client a dishonest opinion.
Everything mentioned above suggests that the court take Steamboat Willy’s side in this scenario, though the consequences for Fred Sanford may be different. Section 16 of the Theft Act of 1968 states that “a dishonest valuation could amount to obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception from another person” (Tennant, 2020, p. 3). Steamboat Willy is a victim in this case, and Fred Sanford will probably have to pay him in the amount equal to the monetary damage of the fraud, which would be more than $150,000. However, there is a change that Fred Stanford will be facing imprisonment according to the regulations established by the Theft Act: imprisonment for five years is the maximum penalty (Tennant, 2020). The involved sum of money is considerably high, which means there is a significant chance the court will sentence Fred Stanford to incarceration.
Reference
Tennant, A. (2020). The valuation of chattels. Wealth Tax Commission Background Paper, 140. Web.