|
Well, here's as much as I know of the story. This equipment was included in the liquidation sale of a farm which had been inherited by a family of six brothers and sisters. The farm was purchased by a conservation organization, and after the sale was concluded, a dispute arose about whether all of the farm equipment was intended to be included in the transfer. One of the six siblings would now like to reacquire the tractor, bush hog, and mower, probably more for sentimental reasons than for continued use. The conservation organization is willing to agree to this reconveyance, but because it is a nonprofit organization, it must receive "fair value" for the equipment, in order to satisfy its obligations as a charitable organization and to be fair to the remaining five siblings. The person who would like to reacquire the equipment has the most familiarity with it, and now says that the equipment is in very poor shape. More specifically, the tractor is said to need a new seat, four new tires, a new alternator, new voltage regulator, new battery, and new brakes. The tractor is also said to have no odometer or usage meter, to have a cracked engine block, and to only have a partially-functioning lift (?). The Dynabalance mower is said to have no drive belt and needs new bearings. The bush hog, which I did not mention earlier, is said to be without its blades and its main drive shaft, and is said to have a gear box which leaks significantly. While all of this sounds awful, I know that the tractor also was driven and used as recently as last year. The sibling who desires to repurchase the tractor has offered the conservation organization a small sum, or has said that they could come pick the tractor up and haul it off for scrap value. I simply am trying to help the organization make a correct and fair decision, and any advice would be much appreciated.
|
