"PCGS" must appear in address to route package to proper receiving area and other problem orders

migueldelrio

"PCGS" must be used in submission address to route package to proper receiving area since PSA and the various and sundry other Collectors Universe organizations use the same PO Box.

After consulting with Tasi, it became clear that PCGS could not be replaced by a code, such as "MJackson," and that an electronic submission number would be ignored if included in the order reference number printed on the address label.

One earlier submission did not have "banknote" marked on the package so it was routed to the problem orders department where Paulina Cooley claimed that the package contents had no submission form, that the return address was not for a recognized customer, AND that the customer had no submission privileges. These are the PMG photos of that submission:

Yet another submission was routed to the problems orders department from PSA receiving. After grading failed to properly identify two of the coins (the coins are a full troy ounce 5 pesos, not a quarter troy ounce one peso), the submission languishes once again in the problem orders department. See versus .

Also have taken into account the grading of the coin 39414747 2008 Sol Central Railroad of Peru MS 67 which, once liberated from its holder and the grease marks removed by NCS, received an NGC PF69 grade (2847255-004).

Why did the PCGS coin have an MS grade while the same coin received a proof grade from NGC? Even though the Peruvian commemorative coins struck by the Lima mint have the legal description "de fondo brillante y de relieves de tono mate," this phrase is not be construed as technical description corresponding to a "brilliant uncirculated" grade (even though the mint's catalog propagates the same misinterpretation). When translated to English, these coins are described by Peruvian law as being "of brilliant (mirrored) background and matte (frosted) reliefs."

NGC graders are not catalogers confused by idioms, it would appear.

Yet, the purported infallibility of the NGC labels is a nuisance, as well. This coin, certification 39327139, was mislabeled "Flamenco" rather than "Bolero" as the coin documentation attests, simply borrowing the label from the NGC listing. This is the coin documentation:

Since I agree in principal with my insurance company's request that the package contents not be revealed by any outside markings on the package, I have no hesitation in suspending PCGS submissions until a better arrangement can be established.