The Infamous 1995W Eagle in PCGS-PR70DCAM!

wondercoin

I posted the other day in a thread that Bob Lecce is a "class act". And, he is.

But, I got a couple PM's from folks over the past couple days pointing out that Bob should have removed the PR70 Eagle from his Registry set after he sold the coin. Knowing Bob is an honorable dealer, I just called him today to ask him about it.

Bob does not make it a habit of revealing the terms of private deals with collectors, but what I gather from my discussion is the coin was CONDITIONALLY SOLD with a right of the purchaser to sell the coin back to the dealer. Until such time as the deal was FINAL, it was agreed the coin would remain in B. Lecce's Registry set and the purchaser would not register it.

Does anyone know if the PCGS Registry Rules covers conditional sales with right of return? This is very interesting. Wondercoin

dbldie55

What is the normal time span for right of return. We are talking months here. If he gets it back, he can re-register it under the current finest. This is even better than leasing and unlike the leasing thread, this is real and not made up.

DAM

Wondercoin,

After reading your post I was curious so I checked the rules. This is what is said... "Registrants are urged to delete their sets (or coins) from the registry soon after sets or coins are sold in order to release the certification numbers for other registrants who may have purchased the items and wish to register them".

From what you said in your post it doesn't sound like there was an intent to deceive. But it does, possibly set the stage for other set owners to do the same, which could cause problems at some point.

I would just hate to see the Registry, and our hobby, become tainted because of negative press resulting from issues like this. This should be fun, not a win at all costs game.

DAM

keithdagen

In order to list your set as current, you must own the coins you are listing or be an agent with permission to represent a collection.

Sounds like Mr. Lecce does not legally own the coin, but that the person he sold it to has a return privelege.

The question here is what constitutes "return privelege." Since the purchaser subsequently listed the coin on E-Bay, it seems that he has foregone that privelege since John Q Public could buy the coin if the reserve were met. Mr. Lecce should delist the coin immediately from his set unless he outright purchases the coin again in the future.

Eagleman

You own it-register it! You dont own it-remove it from the registry! I have been in contact with Mr. Lecce and he totally refused to remove the coin! He told me to contact Gayle and this i did! I agree with the other comments in this thread that after 4 months this coin should be removed his collection! If PCGS allows him to keep this coin in his collection you can bet that every coin i sell i will retain the right to keep it in my registry! And you know what? The Registry will become a laughing stock! I really dont know what the problem is about removing the coin from Current Finest! Mr. Lecce still would be able to keep the coin in his collection under ALL TIMES FINEST!

wondercoin

Keith: Where the party of the first part conditionally buys a numismatic valuable from the party of the second part with a right to return such valuable and the right to return has not expired, does the party of the first part automatically surrender his "return privilege" simply buy offering the valuable for sale in a public forum (with or without the permission of the party of the second part)? You say yes? Do you have case law on that point, because you may be stretching on that one? Wondercoin.

keithdagen

Mitch,

If someone hit that reserve, then the coin had to be legally sold on E-Bay. I would say at that point, the seller lost his return privelege, because it wasn't listed in the description as transferrable. It's been 7 years since I took Business Law, so no cases for you. Since the seller's intent by listing the piece was to sell it, why not give it back to Mr. Lecce at that point?

wondercoin

Keith: Purely hypothetical, but what if you conditionally bought a coin at $17,000 with a right to return in 6 months at $16,000. Until someone actually hits that "reserve met" price, what would stop someone from attempting to get $20,000 for the coin? I agree, once the coin sold at $20,000, the original conditional sale would be defeated.

Anyway, apart from this legal mumbo-jumble, I agree that the SPIRIT of the Registry is to REMOVE THE COIN at the time of the conditonal sale. That is simply my opinion. I get the sense Bob Lecce had no "bad intent" here at all, but now is a bit defensive after how this all "came down". Wondercoin.

keithdagen

I guess the question is "when does ownership change hands?"

It is a good question because I do know some dealers who offer lifetime buyback priveleges. How do you factor that one in? In my mind, it would be different if the seller had been granted a right of first refusal on the piece, however that does not seem to be the case here. When offering a return privelege, a seller does not have an option (usually) to force the buyer to return the piece. So in my opinion, a coin sold should be immediately delisted, even if you may have it return to your collection down the road. Can always be relisted.

DAM

I think there's too much legal schmegal talk going on. This is a discussion about a coin in a Registry Set for crying out loud. Sounds like the reply Eagleman got was ... Too bad about what you want, I'm going to make and adhere to my own rules.

I don't have the pleasure of knowing Mr. Lecce. But if I did I would ask him to get off his high horse.

Not what I thought the Registry was about, by a long shot!

keithdagen

DAM,

To be fair to Mr. Lecce, I have never dealt with him, but have had a few conversations about him potentially buying some of my coins. Very fair, and seems like an honest person. The prices he was offering were very fair at the time, but I chose to hold a little longer.

When he first purchased the coin, he took a significant amount of flack on this board because of the purchase price involved, and the potential for other coins to be graded 70DC. It doesn't surprise me that he may have been a little defensive, because very few people have had anything postive to say about his investment.

wondercoin

DAM: I agree. Bottom line should be that if you sell a coin, conditional or otherwise, the coin is considered sold for registry purposes. That RULE should be clearly stated by PCGS to avoid any confusion such as here. Wondercoin.

Bear

Dam - Legal schmegal , is that a term of art. In any event I agree, This is not so much a legal issue, as it is a matter of integrety and honor. In the fraternity of collecting , doing the right thing seems more important then being clever and cutting the corners of appropriate behavier. Bear, and an angry one at that. GROWWLLL.

DAM

Keith: I meant no disrespect to Mr. Lecce. I just think it's a shame rules are made to suit one's needs here, just because it's an expensive coin. If coin's value were $10, I don't think this thread would exsist.

Wondercoin: The shame is, like everything else in the world today, it seems you must have a legal document to spell everything out. What ever happened to common sense?

keithdagen

DAM,

Wondercoin's a lawyer. Expect it from him.

wondercoin

Keith: I would like to think of myself more as a "statesman". Bob Lecce has now agreed to remove his coin from the Registry. Wondercoin.

DAM

Keith,

I knew that. I've been a voyeur of this forum for about a year.

With that in mind, perhaps Wondercoin like to draft rule changes and present them to PCGS in an effort to circumvent future problems, such as this.

keithdagen

I would like to think of myself more as a "statesman".

Nobody buys that.

DAM

Since there seems to be no further business to discuss, I move to adjurn, and I'll go to work on my boat.

psxchelly

I hate to re-hash the "leasing" thing, but this is also a matter for the rest of the sets as well. It isnt all that fair to people trying to build REAL sets and own the actual coin.

What chance does anyone else have at being number 1 if people CHEAT. thats all it is.. cheating.

Bcsican

This situation is the same as selling your entire set : once its sold YOU ARE NO LONGER ABLE TO ADD COINS period, wht should you be able to keep a coin that is being offerd to sell? If this is the case let me continue my first sets point #s and add the coins only that I need, The coin is being sold remove it from that registry set, PERIOD.....

keets

do you think it really makes sense to get into all kinds of comparisons and legal wranglings that are just a little deep? the rules as quoted by keith are fairly clear and it's refreshing for me to know, as mitch pointed out, that BobbyL is going to do the right thing and edit his set. as stated, it will still list as #1 in the finest known and should remain there. open discussion has served us well.

al h.

MJCoin

I was just browsing through the registry and not only did BobbyL delete the 1995W Silver Eagle froim his #1 current finest set, he deleted the whole set! And he also deleted his #3 current finest MS-Modern Gold Commemorative set. After further examination I believe he deleted ALL of his current finest sets!

littlewicher

What's up with him lately?

BobbyL

I have decided to remove every coin of mine from the Registry. I will never have to deal with this again. It's just not worth it. I spent the
better part of the day explaining this transaction to numerous people. I have much better things to do with my time.

I explained how I felt the transaction was not over until the return privledge or buy back had expired. I was basically called a liar by
someone at PCGS and asked for proof of this transaction. I don't need to be treated like a criminal especially when I feel I was instrumental in helping promote Modern PCGS Registry coins for the past year through my ads and submissions which have reached or surpassed 20,000 coins.

When my customer listed the coin on eBay he received emails that he was a fraud and that he didn't own the coin. I understand the concerns of others in this situation but one should get the facts before they accuse someone of wrong doing.

I will devote my time and effort to the NGC Registry where I feel the coins are undervalued.
Thank you all for hearing me out.
Good Bye Registry,
Bob Lecce

wondercoin

Bobbie: Anyone that has dealt with you, as I have, knows you are a class act. I wouldn't get too concerned what some employee at PCGS felt about this situation.

I do applaud the efforts of several Registry supporters to ferret out the situation though. I have been aware of serious Registry offense(s) in the past involving sets where coins are not owned by the registered collector. At first, I approached the subject too lightly and in the wrong manner (jokingly accusing HD of leasing coins with his advance permission and participation). But, at least the issue got the attention of PCGS, who will not tolerate abuse in the Registry system. If PCGS is overzealous now to deal with Registry issues, I believe that will still be beneficial to the situation and will stop the abuses out there.

You showed me and most other Registry collectors today why you had no bad intent here whatsoever. But, the PR70 Eagle deal was certainly not the "typical" deal and due to its convoluted struture it likely ran afoul of the PCGS Registry rules on keeping a coin in a set. No biggie. We all learned something today. Let's move on. Wondercoin.

DeepCoin

I have watched this post for a while and as usual when two parties disagree it can get messy. This hobby is supposed to be FUN! At least that is how the small band of Merc collectors here approach it.

On this issue, not to get caught up in the legalese, BobbyL is wrong in his way of thinking. Once you sell something, it is no longer yours. Yes, you may get it back, but it is not yours and should be removed from your registry set. Given that I revel in my 14th place standing and will probably never get to the top ten, I don't know how it feels to be number one and then have to relinquish the title. Maybe it is like boxing and people try to hang on too long.

Anyway, there is no reason to have a fit. Reasonable people should be able to disagree without going nuts. It seems to me that it is BobbyL's perrogative (sp?) to take his coins and leave, but I will say that he has at least 50% of the responsibility for what has transpired (Once you sell a coin it is no longer yours, no matter how you rationalize it). That said, I would like to see him come back. We all take ourselves too seriously sometimes, take a breath, smile and join in the FUN. This is not life or death, it is a hobby.

IrishMike

Deepcoin, some very good points. Howeverif some of the board members did what he said and emailed the seller of the coin, then they have crossed over the line.

windycitytrio

BobbyL,
I do not know you (I have not had the good fortune of dealing with you yet), but don't be too quick to sever ties with PCGS. For better or worse, the PCGS slab is still perceived as the best out there. Yes NGC is good, but particularily in regards to what I deal in (SLQ"S & gold) I get better prices for my PCGS slabs than NGC slabs. Just a thought...comments?

BJ

Just an update on this situation...

If you've been following this thread, you probably know that Bob Lecce removed his sets from the registry on Monday night. This was a result of correspendence with him regarding the PR70 Eagle he was listing. I have known Bob for many years and have no doubt of his integrity, but under the circumstances I felt that I needed to see documentation to show that he still owned the coin especially in light of the fact that the coin showed up on ebay last week. The rules are that you must be an owner of a coin to register it. Even though he said that technically he was still the owner, if I was to back him up, I had to be able to prove it. This would be the case for any one of you with coins registered in the set registry, whether you were new to me or I had known you for 20 years.

Since yesterday, Bob and I have had several correspondences. He has revealed to me that he now has possession of the coin again with complete ownership. This being the case, he is entitled to reactivate his set to current status, which he plans to do. In fact, all of his sets will be returned to active status.

In my opinion, Bob Lecce is an honorable man and dealer you can trust. Any misunderstanding about what the rules are to list coins have now been cleared up. Should you have any questions, please feel free to email me directly.

Thanks.