Any lawyers on the forum?
sjjs28
Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭
Just curious how members of the legal forum would consider the merits or lack thereof related to this story.
I made a sizeable purchase through EBAY - $5000+
Upon receipt it had a print defect that was less than noticeable on the scan, but very evident on the card when it was in-hand.
I received the card today and asked for the return the same day.
Particulars:
Seller_ did_ post that there were no returns. However I'm aware of Ebay's overarching support of buyers in these circumstances....
I paid promptly
And announced the request for return promptly.
Seller granted the return
Is there standing for a suit to be brought forth for "breach of contract?"
Just curious if I should "lawyer up" based on his threats?
Steve Saldutti
sjjs28@comcast.net
Collector of 1964 Topps Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals
Registered Sets: 1964 Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
sjjs28@comcast.net
Collector of 1964 Topps Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals
Registered Sets: 1964 Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'm a little torn with this one...
Nice card, correctly graded, centering is PERFECT.
I've been in the same situation as a buyer. Trying to analyze a poor camera photo, bad lighting, and everything else wrong with the provided images. I realize I probably shouldn't buy it w/o the proper information.
I'm usually a BIN buyer. Time is of the essence. Sitting around waiting for a better image. By the time I MIGHT get it, card is sold.
SELLERS, BUY A DAMN SCANNER!
P*ss poor images for cards that are 1000s of dollars is ridiculous.
{step down from soapbox}
thank you
P.S. FYI, sometimes searching the cert # will bring up a previous sale w/a better image. Sometimes, maybe rarely
Sorry I disagree with most opinions.
What is PSA. ? In sport terms is like a referee. seller opinion is subjective, buyer opinion is subjective, that is why we let in hand of PSA, the expert opinion. Yes they are subjective also, but is the third party accepted for most. Many buyers expect something is clear not to be expected. 90% or more of PSA grading is accurate. If somebody is looking for that 10% of sub-rated items, is at own risk. You can blame seller if the cosmetic condition of the capsule is not well exposed, like broken corners, scratches etc, but about the grading no. Grading 8 is 8 , no more . Some guys says ? I was expecting something more!!, expecting what? nobody can sell dreams. If you see something graded 8, y you notice perfect centering, perfect corners, edges, you have to keep in mind surface condition is not visible, no at 100% details, and that is the 2 points missing could be there.
If the Seller Policy is NO RETURNS, then I'm thinking the buyer here should not be trying to return it. The seller sold a PSA 8, the buyer received the PSA 8 that the seller listed (not a different Seaver PSA 8, the exact card that was pictured in the listing).
If the Seller accepted Returns, or if the Seller embellished the card by saying it's the best card he's ever seen, etc... then I could understand a return (I actually returned a graded card to a seller that accepted returns and also embellished a mis-graded card). But if the seller simply listed it as a PSA 8, well that is what he sold and delivered to the buyer...
Besides, as someone pointed out, down the road you will wish you still owned this card...
p.s. in this case if the return is happening, I would expect the buyer to cover some of the total shipping/insurance fees. and also if there were payment processing fees that won't get returned to the seller. I'm not sure on eBay managed payments if you get the ~2.3% processing fees back. I think with PayPal you do not get the processing fees back...
Gonna chime in at this stage ...
As every collector worth his salt (IMHO, only!) collects cards NOT holders.
A PSA 8 is not a PSA 8 in EVERY instance, especially when the details of the card are not fully/accurately displayed.
AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING there was intent to hide details of the card with the low-res scan -
It my contention, and other learned collectors have agreed when both photos are shown - the auction scan and the "in-hand" 1200 DPI scanner view - it is obvious to most that the auction scan was lacking in detail.
That why I was shocked when I open the parcel and saw the delivered card.
I really wanted to slip the card into my collection when I bought it and I told the seller so - but I couldn't get past the off-registration print marks as I viewed the card in-hand.
That's when I reached out to request a return. He originally said no. He returned a rant threatening legal action and I would be sued to recoup lost funds.... (I can post the rant if there is a great deal of interest - but I would prefer to leave personalities out of this discussion). Further, that's what prompted my starting this thread ....
That's when I told him I was going to go thru EBAY's review process and if necessary explain how the card was not accurately represented by the scan (with photo evidence if necessary). Everybody that has contributed to this thread has seen (or can see) the photo evidence I was going to us.... Then he said yes.
And that's where we are today -
sjjs28@comcast.net
Collector of 1964 Topps Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals
Registered Sets: 1964 Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
I see enough in the original pic to make me ask for a better pic or more questions as to if what I am seeing is correct. sorry, doesn’t fly. again, this isn’t a pack of juicy fruit. you cost the guy a couple hundred bucks for not being thorough.
personally i think it was a match made in heaven.
(at the very least, you should offer to ship the card back on your dime. again. at the very least)
furthermore, looks like the guy has 100% feedback rating and sells pretty mid-to high dollar stuff. all the feedback seems pretty glowing. i would recommend that he gets a scanner but for the most part 100% of his customers are very well pleased. that kinda speaks volumes in and of itself.
I actually saved the seller to see if negative or neutral feedback is left.
and no, I’m not the seller nor is he a pal.
I found the original listing. When you open the original listing and hover over both pictures he provided of the front, you clearly see the "ghosting" on the pop-up magnified picture.
On the bright side, I don't think the seller was trying to hide anything as the pictures for the Seaver are consistent with all of his other listings. Sometimes you can tell if a seller is trying to hide something when they provide crystal-clear scans for most of their listings, but for some listings the pictures are "shady" (bad lighting, poor angles, low-resolution, etc...). Not the case with this seller (imo)
I sell a bit on ebay and want potential buyers to see exactly what they are getting. The first thing I did was buy a good scanner. I scan my items with a contrasting background and add a scan of the back. Once I sell something, I don't want it back.
I also think I understand ebay's return policy and therefore do NOT understand why a seller has the "no returns" option. Someone posted that buyers can return items simply if they "changed their mind", or "found one cheaper"!?!?!?!?!?!?
The seller is a bit "lazy" here imo and got burned. I don't accuse him of trying to fool anyone, he has almost 3,000 transactions. Buy a scanner. Many of his images provided are poor, some like the 1973 Reggie Jackson, are very well done.
As a buyer on ebay I avoid all items that don't have a good scan of the front and back of the card. Sometimes I ask for more scans, but usually I just get more garbage.
Not sure what the seller said to the buyer, but it's uncalled for if he was_ insulting or threatening in any way_. As far as eye appeal goes, card in hand looks nothing like the one in original listing. I think it's graded one grade too high with the way it looks.
I am not an expert on this card. In looking at a few 8's on ebay, I am amazed at the print problems on some of the cards that got an 8. One of them has half of the color "washed out" on the word "METS", two others have some pretty bad print spots in the black under Seaver's photo.
This seller has some FANTASTIC items!
Some of the points mentioned here are valid. The buyer could have asked for more pictures before making the purchase. That being said , there are some incorrect points. (1) the seller will not be out of hundreds of dollars, he/she will receive a final value fee credit after the return is completed. Yes it is a pain in the behind to take the return and seller will be out some shipping costs , time and effort. Having returns does affect the eBay seller metrics in a negative manner.(2) it doesn’t really matter whether the seller “accepts” returns , eBay buyer protection and tos, gives broad latitude with regards to returns. The buyer will win most cases. There were recent updates to eBay policy with regards to sports cards category returns which can be found in the fine print. If you go to any auction house or major eBay sports card seller or consignment house, you will see they all have high resolution dpi scans front and back of cards especially high dollar items. I have been on eBay since 1999 and am a trs power seller . I always have used a flatbed scanner and never had a card return. I am just a collector so my volume is not that high. My observation over the years is that eBay is basically a Wild West free for all with regards to selling practices. Buyers and sellers need the protection and that’s what the fees are paying for. Btw Facebook groups are pretty much the same. Enough with the dirty fingernails, biblical verses crappy cellphone pictures , scammers etc. As one of the posters stated above - put your big boy pants on if you want to sell expensive items.
Very well said.
Agree w your assessment. It’s the centering though and lack of issues in the “Mets” area as I previously mentioned that puts it in its 8 holder. If it wasn’t as framed or had the typical pd, I would agree w the 7. Having bought several over the years, a card with both of those qualities on the same card is a pretty rare find. Problem is there’s no such thing as a perfect card. And certainly agree that seller needs a scanner or at least provide better and consistent pictures considering he’s not peddling junk here or just an occasional seller. Of course doesn’t let the op off the hook though. Caveat Emptor.
Check your facts. If they are still on PayPal, they most certainly will be out that money. not sure what happens w eBay managed payments. but couple the 2.3% w the two shipping, insurance and signature fees along w supplies & his time, it’s getting close to a couple hundred bucks.
And no ones negating that he doesn’t have the right to return it. Its eBay after all. Problem is the headaches coulda been easily avoided. He coulda offered something and taking responsibility for his part. We don’t even know how the return was even initiated. Did he contact him first or just open the case? Was he polite in his return and ask or did he force it? Is he mad at the seller or mad at himself and that the card wasn’t up to his personal snuff.
Again, from the original listing, it’s clearly there. why doesn’t he just man up, admit his mistake and offer to make it right or keep it and resell it. Just because you CAN return anything for any reason and force a return does not make it morally right. I’ve yet to see anyone point out that they felt the seller was being deceptive or attempting to hide anything. Pics are consistent w everything else he’s selling and his feedback is stellar.
In literally every other instance on the boards it's "buy the card, not the holder." For some reason, whenever this topic comes up, a bunch of people come out with "well did you ask the seller if the card had been previously soaked in cat urine? No? So you bought a PSA 8 and got a PSA 8. What's the issue here?"
Everybody knows every card in a grade is not equivalent to every other example of that card in that same grade. Some people are looking for great centering, some want sharp corners, some want a great print job, some just don't GAF. But why is the onus on the buyer to ask questions about unknown but possible flaws instead of having the onus being on the seller to simply be transparent and disclose every potential issue with the card?
So he should have asked if there as an overstrike. What else should he have asked for? Are there any indentations in the surface? Are there any scratches in the surface? If so, how many, how deep, and where are they located? Is there any edge chipping on the card? How many possible scenarios does the buyer have to come up with in order to protect himself and make sure he's getting a card he wants? All because someone uses their Nextel flip phone to upload pictures to eBay.
Look, if you're just out there selling $15-$20 modern cards you're pulling from a pack, fine. But if you want to sell big boy cards, act like an adult and get a scanner. You'll never have to worry about something like this again. Hell, it will probably pay for itself in the first three to six months.
Arthur
I was originally going to say the buyer should be open to splitting the shipping costs, but if the seller went off on me with any kind of threats, that would be off the table.
Both you and the seller here are WAY MORE big time than I could ever be (although I was briefly a "power seller" oh boy!).
That being said there seems to be no way to force a buyer to keep a card he is not happy with, no matter the cost.
Has it been disclosed how the “return” was initiated? The fact that op is even posing a thread ad asking for free legal advice is suspect and petty, IMO. It doesn’t a take an attorney to handle this situation in an adult manner. I’m guessing the seller didn’t fly off the handle right off the rip unless he was blindsided by the return and money taken from his account without any prior notice from op.
I am sure that when a PayPal refund is given, the fees are also returned to the account. I use eBay managed payments, but I am not sure about the refund policy. Yes the seller is going to be out time , aggravation, and shipping costs both ways which may amount to up to $50 or so if usps priority express mail plus insurance and signature was utilized.
Take the high road and when you complete the transaction and time has past, re evaluate your position.
At the end of the day, I think tossing the guy an amount YOU deem to be your fair portion for what he’s out on the deal is the right move. You bought a card, he shipped it, you returned it and he (begrudgingly) took it back.
Still, he’s out a decent buck and disappointed; you could soften that blow if you chose and give the entire deal a much better ending for all parties involved.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
>
on a $50 card, maybe not. on a $6000 card? Bet your arse, if there aren’t great pics, I’m asking questions. every time.
Definitely agree on better pics.
wouldn't it be nuts if this card was submitted for PSA Review and it actually got a bump to 8.5 (just based on the centering, corners and edges)? But I doubt that would happen...
Agree that this seller should consider better pictures considering the high-end cards he is selling.
All the ones he needs to to get comfortable with the purchase. Caveat emptor.
Under eBay rules, sure, the card can be returned. But I’m not getting everyone jumping on the seller here for quality of the pics. This is not a “not as described” item. Not by a long shot.
Since opinions are being given, here is mine....
As a seller, I take much better pictures of cards, especially more expensive ones. That said, the card was listed as a PSA graded card, Buyer bought said card, buyer should have to keep the card, period, end of story. Buying on ebay is a gamble and I have yet to see a thread of someone buying a card and sending extra money to the seller when it grades high, so in this case, the card was graded by PSA, if theres a problem, then PSA is who you should have a problem with, not the buyer. If anything, the fees should be returned to the seller BY the buyer. If you are so picky you want a SPECIFIC graded card, then buy it in person. Bluntly, the buyer is screwing the seller here.
they are not as of oct last year. 100% crystal clear and positive
I was wrong above though. It’s 2.9% + $.30 of the transaction that is kept, not 2.3%. 😉
So by my calculation 2.9% of $6k = $174 + $ .30 and call it $40 ($20 each way) in shipping, insurance & signature confirmations. then throw in the supplies, time & a couple aspirin for the headache & we are well over “a couple hundred bucks”. AND this is on the non-taxable figure. if he was charged sales tax then the fee schedule is even higher.
This card was graded many years ago and I wouldn't be surprised if a PD qualifier were assigned to it if it were submitted today. In my experience, PSA is tougher today on surface and registration issues than they were years ago.
In any case, in light of the pronounced "double exposure" effect on this card, a better scan or pic is necessary and if I were the seller I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the buyer weren't happy with the card once he received it based on the pics in the listing.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
PSA has always been inconsistent with registration issues/out of focus. I rarely see cards with an 'OF' qualifier. It's probably the least flagged production flaw in the grading process. I personally don't like those cards.
This is a pretty large penalty I agree.
Return shipping should be on the buyer. This case is a bit different if the seller was an a$$ about it, but generally speaking if the card isn't misrepresented, buyer should pay postage.
Ebay is a very buyer friendly site, sellers should know that. The benefit for sellers is huge when you consider running a brick and mortar shop or selling in other ways.
Just for anecdotal information.
I'm going to pay for overnighted expedited return shipping once I get confirmation of the address he wants the card returned to - I'm not going to have him pay for shipping ...
Not commenting on, more than I already have, if the seller was less than receptive
sjjs28@comcast.net
Collector of 1964 Topps Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game and 1969 Topps Decals
Registered Sets: 1964 Stand Ups, 1965 Embossed, 1968 Topps Game, 1969 Topps Decals
I think you will be all right and I do not think you will need a lawyer. Either way good luck and I hope you find the right Seaver.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
It seems to me from a very quick read of this thread that sellers/dealers are more on the side of the seller and the collector/seller (to fund other cards) are on the side of the buyer. One of the first things I learned when I started selling on eBay was to provide an accurate description of the item you are selling. The pictures were not accurate in my opinion. I think the seller probably was not trying to deceive the buyer but certainly did a poor job of representing the card accurately with his pictures. I would have certainly been disappointed with the registration on that card and would have returned it as well.
I know when purchasing a high-dollar card the buyer should ask questions etc.. if they are uncertain about the condition. Based on the sellers feedback everything looked great and the buyer might assume pictures provided would represent accurately the card being sold. Time is of the essence when buying a high-dollar rookie card and buyers have to react or they may miss out. Buyers make quick assessments based on the information at hand and sometimes those quick assessments can be costly for the seller.
I recently had a return on eBay for a Jerry West rookie card. My scans were very good and the buyer communicated with me and I pointed out to him that the reason for the grade was a spider wrinkle and I gave him the location so he could see it. Buyer seemed to be ok with it and purchased the card. After receiving it he immediately requested a return (which was granted automatically because of my 30 day return policy). The buyer sent a picture of the card back showing more than just one tiny wrinkle. I assumed that spider wrinkle was understood by the buyer (my mistake). I appreciated that the buyer sent a picture back detailing what was misunderstood. I thanked him and moved on knowing full well that I was on the hook for shipping etc... I will not make that mistake again with the spider wrinkle. I rarely have a return as I try to accurately describe the card as best I can with scans and description.
WTF is a spider wrinkle?
Small surface wrinkle on the card which is typically a technical downgrade to a PSA 5 at best. Card may look gem mint in the scan but the surface wrinkle is evident once the card is tilted under the light.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
To me, it's a very small crease in the card often only shows up on one side of the card.
Most likely came from the pack that way as opposed to a crease that often happens after card is carelessly handled.
could be. but just for anecdotal additions, i buy way more than i sell. however just like my day job and customers, i try to avoid avoidable headaches. it's pretty much agreed by everyone that the seller could have had better scans. yet with 3000 other the deals, everyone was either happy or probably asked follow up questions and/or asked for better pics. i've yet to see op claim he did any of this. we've also haven't heard a peep as to how the return was done. and i'm assuming he didn't reach out prior, like your customer did, and just blindsided the seller with a return thus causing the reaction of the seller. which i would shame the seller for doing and reacting like that.
but i would also counter that coming on here, starting a thread asking for a free legal consultation on something so mundane also shows another example of the lack of proper due diligence. never have i once felt the need to consult an attorney over a card purchase especially when i'm protected by paypal, ebay and my credit card company. what's the guy going to sue him over? does he really think the guy is going to come into his state and fork over for a $500/hour attorney to recoup $240 in fees? and while YES, the buyer most certainly did cause him a loss, i mean, cmon though. the purchase and thread was easily avoidable and just lacks common sense, imo. kudos for the buyer for doing the bare minimum though and paying for his own return. maybe he'll splurge on a bottle of aspirin to through in too.
Take almost any 1978 baseball card you have (sorry @softparade lol) and in the sunlight look at it on an angle while tilting it back and forth and you will see what spider wrinkling is.
For those commenting on the grade being an 8, here is a thought or possibility... That card looks pretty sharp from the few blurry photos we have seen. Is there any chance that the submitter had an otherwise perfect card and asked for no qualifiers? If that card is 10 quality, with the registration and request for no qualifiers, it would knocked the grade down to an 8.
it really is. honestly, if those saying it deserves an 8pd basically knocking it down to a straight 6, i would implore them to notify me when any of those 6s hit the market. i would take everyone i could get.
just to drop some more seaver in here.
took me a couple of years to find one that fit my criteria of decent centering and no washed out/pd in the purple mets text that plagued most of the 67 seaver's.
1977 too
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball
Spider wrinkling is easy to pick out. But I never saw any rampant issues with all of the material I have handled. Just have to be alert to it!
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Damn. A scanner would've paid for itself twice over just on this transaction alone.
I simply don't understand the logic of:
Seller posts crap pictures (always coincidentally hiding the subsequent issue) but it's the BUYER's responsibility to play 20 questions and hope that they ask the right question that gets the seller to reveal what they already took action once to conceal. How is it not the seller's responsibility to provide complete and clear images of the entire card (nevermind actually, you know, MENTIONING that there's an abnormality with the card in the listing)?
This just blows my mind.
Arthur
What's the difference between a politician and a Flying Pig? ..... the letter "F".
My feelings here exactly. don't you just LOVE the photos with the card turned almost sideways to make it appear more centered? Who do these guys think they are fooling? Apparently some fall for it.
Another pet peeve, sellers turn the image so that it's "right side up" I find myself twisting my head around when looking at sideways cards LOL.
Coming from a sales background, there seems to be two ways to go; open and honest = less sales and less drama or lazy/sneaky = a few more sales and a lot more drama.
yep. especially when the buyer knows he's looking at less than stellar pics. have you even looked at the original pics? you couldn't see the shadowing? everyone else could. so it's not 20 questions, it's one. "that appears to be shadowing along the top, can i get a better pic?". your previous analogy of asking if the card was soaked in cat urine is just asinine and does not apply either. everyone is saying the pics are blurry and unclear though, so it is of your opinion on knowing this to just go ahead and flop down $6k? THAT blows my mind. i wish i had that kinda scrap to just toss out w/o care based on crap pics alone. must be nice,
of course he coulda just moved on too, right?
the same pics also sufficed for 3000 folks. most likely because they asked a follow up question or two. certainly not 20 or anything reminiscing an inquiry about cat urine,
You are ALSO absolutely correct!!!! 100%.
The factors I consider are, that the images are not that good (no, not that bad either) and in the end, the seller is going to get the shaft almost every time on ebay. Personally, I would have made sure the defect was obvious in the photo, if not mentioned outright in the description.
If the card ends up getting lost in the mail, the seller is out big time.
My dad would have said the seller in this case was "asking for trouble". He's obviously an experienced seller, with some absolutely beautiful cards. He also has a lot of pretty lousy photos of his cards, some have so much glare they are basically worthless. Take the time to present your items to try to avoid this exact scenario.
I always just move on when I see bad scans, but with this particular card, the scans seemed good and it was easy for me to focus on the centering and corners. When I saw the card where I could see how bad the "double strike" (or whatever you want to call it) was, I would have returned it too.
I would have felt a little bad, if it was a $5 card, I might not have bothered, but for over $5,000.00, I'm returning.
NOT bashing the seller here.
Todd, you are absolutely right. And, respectfully, this is exactly why I don’t understand why PSA has always seemingly been against sub grades. If it was clear on the flip that this is what’s going on, there would be no arguing on this transaction, and this card could possibly be sold for even more.
Impact of providing sub grades on wait times notwithstanding, of course....
I didn't think it was a 10 (OF), thought I saw a tiny bit of corner wear.
This card seems to be a "problem" card from what I have seen on ebay. If I was ever to buy one (never have the money for one this nice) I would certainly insist on high quality images BEFORE bidding.
For those that are explaining what a Spider wrinkle is.... just call it surface wrinkling so not to confuse peeps. I think everyone will understand what surface wrinkling means. But the percentage that would know spider wrinkling, don't think it will be that high. You can't even google spider wrinkle!! I can't even fathom how a spider has a relation as most surface wrinkling is a parallel wave from side to side going down the card. Never seen one in a criss-cross like a spiders web.
In asphalt paving jargon, cracks in the pavement is alligator cracking
1979 as well. LOL
I think the card is a legit 8 due to the strength of its other attributes. However, I value it like I would an otherwise Gem card that has 70-30 centering. Technically it sneaks through the PSA 8 guidelines but I would want to pay below market rate if I wanted the card. Frankly, I'd prefer a high end 7 over these cards that sneak through the 8 criteria.
absolutely agree on this one, if you are so picky you would have picked up there as something going on in his crappy pic as it can be seen and you would have asked for more pics or moved on when you first noticed it on his crappy pic. that centering is great and corners look great and worthy of an 8
as for the lawyer part , even though the seller lost out there isn't much he can do since he agreed to ebay's terms when he listed it on their site