Imagine My Surprise-Two Coins from my Recent Submission
giorgio11
Posts: 4,046 ✭✭✭✭✭
I got my grades online for my 45 coins, of course, before getting the actual coins returned to me yesterday. Besides the 1909-S Indian cent QC Unc Details that has already been shown, I had a 1918/7-D Buffalo that I had hoped might straight grade VF25. Yes, it had some problems, some dark spots/bit of verdigris on the back, chiefly ... But I chose to be optimistic! Nonetheless, the online grade showed as Environmental Damage (97)-VF Details.
Here's the TrueView of the coin in question:
So imagine my surprise when I got the coin back. The coin had been "improved" or "conserved" and the slab now reads "Corrosion Removed--VF Details"!!!! Yes, the coin does look a lot better. You can still see a bit of the verdigris but it's far less noticeable ... and a lot of the dark carbon is lessened as well.
Questions: Is this standard procedure at PCGS? Shouldn't they have called me to ask if I wanted this done (yes, knowing the good outcome, I would have, but that's hindsight)? More importantly, why didn't they do the Trueview_ after_ the improvement rather than before? And why not change the online grade/Trueview description "Environmental Damage (97)-VF Details" to match what is now on the slab (Corrosion Removed-VF Details)?
Here are my_ after _photos taken this morning.
Finally, does this thing now have a shot at a straight grade? And if it does, what is my best approach?
And this is apparently not an isolated occurrence. While I appreciate our host's_ successful _attempts to improve coins that have problems, does it always turn out for the better? In my case, it did. Shouldn't this be communicated?
The second coin is an 1861 copper nickel cent.
The online grade description reads, simply, **"Unc Details-Damage": **
Here's the slab now and my photos (I know, I'm not a great photographer):
Similar questions apply here. I'd appreciate your comments and those of @PCGSPhoto as well.
Kind regards,
George
Comments
Here is another one for you, just happened, (ATS)
Had a coin that belonged to a customer, it was a 1799 Bust dollar PCGS AU-50, he had purchased it years ago , it was very dark. When I bought it back from him last month, sent it back in, and PCGS called it environmental . SO I tried it at NGC, well they called and said they can help the coin, but it would need to be sent thru their conservation service. There would be an additional charge, it was like 4% of the value which is a fairly sizeable fee because of the coins value. I said go ahead, if I can get it into a regular holder it will benefit in the long run, Well after waiting the next few weeks, its coming back AU details cleaned. '
so basically I spent 400 bucks to have it cleaned.
If PCGS did that to the two coins without communication to you, and if you had not indicated anywhere on the submission form that they could take action on surface issues, then I would be extremely annoyed.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
@giorgio11
Sounds like our host was being proactive. Someone from one section (grading?) had to contact someone in the restoration section to get this done. Got a freebie? Normally, cost 2% of the value of the coin (min. $30) for restoration.
https://www.pcgs.com/restoration/
Fairly sure you can have the the certificate description updated with a call to CS.
———
Both the Buff and IHC look very nice!
Odd that they would do this voluntarily but it worked out.
As far as jdimmick's point, I know that NGC will contact an owner if a coin needs to be conserved and I believe that they are honestly trying to improve the coin and cannot guarantee outcomes, but when a conserved coin gets a details grade it's got to be frustrating. They should keep notes when they contact owners and give you a voucher for a free conservation in the future or something.
I've had great success with NGC conservation so take my input with a grain of salt.
On the cent the area in front of the neck looks like it may have been worked on before.
Scary!
I am surprised that work was done without contacting you prior to performing the conservation. That seems unusual...Perhaps you should call customer service to better understand the process. Cheers, RickO
They wouldn't do anything to damage the coins without your consent.
That is not right!
I don't understand how the events could have occurred as you laid them out, unless it was a mistake. I have never heard of PCGS attempting to conserve a coin without permission beforehand.
@scubafuel @logger7 I might have given consent but never had the chance. Nonetheless, that's exactly what happened. I guess my attitude to the whole thing is that I am nonplussed ... and not only by the total opacity of PCGS' system to users like me (I really don't send in coins that often), but by the lack of response from a single PCGS employee here. OK, thank you for improving my coins! You guys obviously get a lot of coins in the door, and someone(s) who treated these coins knew what they were doing. But no call beforehand? And differing labels online and on the slabs? And Trueviews that appear to have been shot before the improvements?
@ricko @tomb @georgiacop50 @davewesen I agree with you about the cent @Hemispherical Proactive is good, saving money is good, the results were good; communicating with your customers who support you is even better @HeatherBoyd @PCGSPhoto
Kind regards,
George
This concerns me, it means that if I send in a coin, and someone at PCGS arbitrarily thinks it can be conserved, they may do this without my permission. Why would I send in a raw coin like that if I have no control on what can be done to it. It should concern everyone, including PCGS........
Statement from PCGS management is requested for this thread based on the OP's comments.
Best, SH
This was claimed to have happened before by a well known poster who was quickly banned for claiming PCGS had done it without his permission.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
I too am not understanding as laid out. Could it be that they are just commenting on the fact that the buff appears to have had corrosion removed, and that the Indian head appears to have a removed spot?
holy. crap.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins]
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
I sent a $1000 Bust dime to NGC and got notification that it had pvc or needed to be conserved and when I said ok it came back Unc. details improperly cleaned. The dealer said he would take it back but blamed NGC for ruining the coin by cleaning it improperly. It was clear to me that the pvc gave the coin the illusion of luster. If a company dips something in acetone or similar solvent and it appears as it really is, that is to say somehow impaired, they were only exposing what was there already albeit hidden.
Hi @giorgio11 hopefully this will clear things up. Our online grades post only with the general description for the no-grade code 92 Cleaned, 98 Damage, etc. Further details print on the slab but do not appear online. Neither coin was conserved or altered in any way.
Regarding the Buffalo Nickel “97 - Environmental Damage – Corrosion Removed” was the grade assigned to the coin. Although only the broad description “Environmental Damage” appears on the online grading results page, “Corrosion Removed” was the reason for the no grade.
The same is true of the 1861 Indian Cent . As in the prior instance, this coin received the 98 “spot removed” grade as part of the normal grading process, but the “spot removed” comment does not appear online.
If you do have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to us.
The coins were part of a big collection I just bought. So it’s not like we were old friends. But in hand, they sure look better than those Trueviews ... I guess Trueviews can emphasize negatives as well as positives! Thanks.
Sooo, the no grades were due to spots that had been removed prior to submission? No conservation performed. My confidence restored.