The Great Park West Gallery $40 Million Donation, Part II

How "Independent" Are the Park West Gallery Appraisers?

By Theresa Franks, for Fine Art Registry®

This is a follow up to Part I of this series in which we examined Park West Gallery's record of art donations (and presumably tax write-offs) to universities and so on (read Part I here).

Park West Galleries, Inc. also operates in Michigan under the assumed name Circle Fine Art Liquidators. Circle Fine Art (once a publicly traded company) went bankrupt and Park West is believed to have bought its stock in a reported May 2, 1996 asset sale. We now have evidence that Caroline Ashleigh appraised a good majority of the Circle Fine Art inventory which Park West Gallery acquired. What we have uncovered here calls into serious question the ethics of the appraiser and not surprisingly, most certainly Park West Gallery's business practices, as you will see below.

A Bit of Backstory

Since Fine Art Registry® has been investigating art auctions aboard cruise ships (it will be two years in April), Park West Gallery has always maintained that it has sought out "independent" appraisers to value its inventory. Just so we are perfectly clear, the term "Independent" is defined by Merriam-Webster as:

1. Not subject to control by others: self-governing.
2. Not affiliated with a larger controlling unit.
3. Not contingent.

Prior to the publication of the New York Times article by Jori Finkel exposing Park West Gallery's deceptive trade practices, whereby victims would demand a refund from Park West, and its customer service representatives (Laura Maki, Mary Gordon and Mary Courson) would regularly send emails to victims requiring them to jump through hoops in order to "prove up" their demand for a refund. In other words, as ridiculous as it sounds, Park West's customers were required to prove that the artwork they bought from Park West Gallery was not worth what Park West Gallery claimed on its appraisals. Now we always thought it should be the other way around - that the onus should be on the seller to prove the authenticity and value of the items sold. Fine Art Registry also believes that it is critically important that one first obtain verifiable provenance and authentication regarding works of art, especially those of deceased masters, prior to seeking out appraisals. For if the work of art is found to be inauthentic, then there would be little need for appraisal as to value.

Park West would insist that the victims - their own customers - obtain an "independent" appraisal, but not from just any independent appraiser. Park West Gallery was quite specific as to whom it would accept appraisals from. In fact, Park West Gallery insisted that the victims of their deceptive trade practices seek out Bernard Ewell and Caroline Ashleigh for an evaluation and appraisal for which a significant fee was charged - a minimum of $250.00 for each appraisal - which would no doubt enrich Ewell and Ashleigh and at the same time would serve to legitimize Park West Gallery's "closed market" pricing. In other words, the Park West recommended appraisers were expected to agree with Park West Gallery's auction retail prices or whatever price Park West Gallery would assign to the work of art being contested. That was presumably a condition imposed by Park West if the appraisers wanted to continue to be retained by Park West (which they both have been.)

Here is an example of one of the many emails we have seen from Park West Gallery to FAR® members who demanded refunds for artwork and in this case, specifically regarding Park West Gallery Dali and Picasso prints:

Bernard Ewell is not the subject of this particular writing, but it is important to mention that Ewell has maintained that he is independent and objective and has never valued any Park West Gallery artwork that he personally authenticated. Notwithstanding the fact that Bernard Ewell is not an acknowledged Dali authenticator within any recognized market setting such as Christie's and Sotheby's, we have seen evidence to the contrary. He has indeed offered written opinions as to value of the Dali prints exclusively offered by Park West Gallery and for which he provided authentication.

It is clear also that Bernard Ewell and Caroline Ashleigh were at least acquainted in 2003, as evidenced by a sworn declaration (or affidavit) signed by Caroline Ashleigh, dated 12 March 2005, and lodged with the Southern Indiana District Court where Ashleigh was sued for civil fraud, wrongful conversion of Indian artifacts, and breach of fiduciary duties among other things. (See Gwen Yeaman, v. Caroline Ashleigh Caroline Ashleigh Associates, Inc. Case No. 1:05-cv-0406-LJM-WTL). In Caroline Ashleigh's sworn testimony, she states at paragraphs 3 and 4, the following:

(Read the Caroline Ashleigh Affidavit.)

Now is all this just a coincidence? Fine Art Registry doesn't think so. Let's recap:

1. Both Bernard Ewell and Caroline Ashleigh are appraisers.
2. Both work or have worked extensively for Park West Gallery.
3. Park West Gallery recommends both appraisers to its customers with the assurance that both appraisers are independent from Park West Gallery.
4. Bernard Ewell resides and has offices in Santa Fe, New Mexico, more than 1500 miles from Oakland County, Michigan.
5. Bernard Ewell arranges a meeting in 2003 with Caroline Ashleigh in Oakland, Michigan, just where Park West Gallery happens to be located.

It is questionable at best to say that either appraiser, Bernard Ewell or Caroline Ashleigh, is independent of Park West Gallery. The evidence shows that they are more dependent on Park West Gallery for their bread and butter than not. But let’s explore a bit more.

Caroline Ashleigh is a "Rug and Textile" appraiser. She is not an appraiser with any expertise that we could find in artwork. This is abundantly evident from a reading of her web site. And like Ewell, she is far from being "independent" as you will soon see. It appears that Caroline Ashleigh was paid to legitimize the "retail pricing" of Park West Gallery artwork. To our knowledge, Ashleigh has zero experience with the valuation of Dali or Picasso works of art.

Did Ashleigh act as an independent appraiser as cited repeatedly by Park West Gallery? Not by a long shot. Not according to the evidence we have uncovered and continue to uncover on a daily basis. We have confirmed with former Park West Gallery insiders that Caroline Ashleigh has been paid a colossal sum of money to prepare "Appraisal Templates" on behalf of Park West Gallery since 2007. This type of practice is often characterized in the industry as an "appraisal mill". Ashleigh is hardly more independent than Al Scaglione, who owns the Park West Gallery inventory and who applies his signature to Park West Gallery Certificates of Authenticity and Appraisals.

Caroline Ashleigh was on retainer with Park West Gallery for the appraisal and consignment of works of art exclusive to Park West Gallery. That's right, when the Park West Gallery victims were refused refunds; they were referred to Caroline Ashleigh to help them sell their Park West Gallery art they sought refunds for on "consignment". Yet Ashleigh's experience is limited to appraisals exclusively related to rugs and textiles and some antiques, such as cowboy hats, vintage western clothing, a paper dress, and a tin carousel. For the most part, her expertise is limited to the valuation of rugs and textiles. It is then a strained stretch for her to have appraised, as reported on her web site, a $75 million dollar institutional art collection (and in other reports she claims $90 million). Hmmm? We wonder whom she performed this gargantuan appraisal for. See Ashleigh's "About Us" link which states in relevant part:

There is only one art dealer that Fine Art Registry knows of that is arrogant enough to lay claim to being the "world's largest art gallery" and that's Park West Gallery. So how do we know that Caroline Ashleigh was contracted by Park West Gallery? What follows is an email that Ashleigh sent to Morry Shapiro in August of 2007, months after Fine Art Registry began its investigation of cruise ship art auctions. Because Park West Gallery and its lawyers actively continue to threaten legal action against everyone and anyone (including world recognized experts, and the victims of the gallery's own deceptive trade practices) that might dare speak out or share information with FAR, we will not disclose the identity of our sources of the information we received concerning Ashleigh here, but rest assured, our information is accurate and reliable. FAR did reach out to Caroline Ashleigh for comment regarding her appraisals for Park West Gallery, but we have yet to hear back from her. We assume she has no comment on the subject:

And then another email sent by Caroline in August of 2008, which reads:

We believe the above-quoted emails to Morris Shapiro prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Caroline Ashleigh is far from independent and far from impartial when it comes to Park West Gallery inventory. The correspondence speaks for itself.

Perhaps Caroline Ashleigh needs a refresher course in what constitutes an "independent" appraisal. The IRS says in relevant part that it must be an individual who:

• has earned an appraisal designation from a recognized professional appraiser organization or has otherwise met minimum education experience requirements prescribed by Treasury regulations;
• regularly performs appraisals for which the individual receives compensation;
• can demonstrate verifiable education and EXPERIENCE in valuing THE TYPE OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO APPRAISAL*;
• IS COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT OF THE DONOR.

[*Note: It is absolutely critical to choose the appropriate appraiser for the type of objects being evaluated. Revenue Procedure 66-49; CFR 601.602, specifically addresses an appraisal by a qualified person and requires that the appraiser submit a summary of the appraiser's qualifications. The credence or weight given to an appraisal by the IRS depends on the qualifications of the appraiser's competence and knowledge of the property he/she is appraising. When choosing an appraiser for an art collection, an inquiry should be made in order to establish whether or not the appraiser is familiar with the market and whether he/she has dealt with the object's subject matter. An appraiser that is an authority on rugs and textiles would not be considered to be the appropriate person to appraise works of visual art.]

If indeed Caroline Ashleigh did appraise any part of any artwork that was donated by Park West Gallery (see Part I of this series), then an official investigation by authorities should be commenced. Moreover, and perhaps even more egregious, given the email correspondence above, it is crystal clear to Fine Art Registry that Caroline Ashleigh was never "independent" or objective which means Park West Gallery has a lot to answer for, and to the extent that Ashleigh accepted appraisal fees from victims, those fees should be refunded without question.

More on this subject in the future as we discover additional facts and evidence.

Art Advocacy Articles ›