@lkenefic said:
Interesting thread... Although the original guarantee was "indefinite" (so 13 years falls into this timeframe), it was only that the coin was "genuine"... which ANACS and NGC have determined to be true. The original guarantee stated nothing about a grade... circulated, MS, or PF. Looks like the original (or subsequent... I'm confused) buyer decided there's enough of a price gap between an MS and a PF that they want money... yours!
FWIW... I'm with the "Pound Sand" contingent in this case...
However the assumption was that it was a genuine mintstate coin and the buyer bought it as such. People can use whatever legalese they want but no one in their right mind would buy a details coin worth maybe $50 at the time for over $500! The buyer relied upon the Anacs tab that stated it was an MS coin not a PR coin. The question continues to be what did the ebay listing state? That is what the contract was based on just as much if a dealer had an ad in Coin World for a raw 1884 3cn with the Anacs tab it was broken out of.
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
"That being said, if you wanted the coin back, I think you would only need to pay the price that was paid to you 13 years ago, so even though the coin is a ANACS PF61 now, I'd only pay the MS60 Details/Cleaned price from 2009. This is assuming that a PF61 is worth a lot more today than the price paid 13 years ago."
The above is the correct thing to do, IMHOP.
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
That post was begging for a “Like” and “Agree” option!
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
This has got to be one of the weirdest transactions I've ever seen. And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two? Both by getting the coin reslabbed and by having the guarantee re-written. He assumed he was getting one coin worth 10X what the far more common proof issue of the same year and type was worth. He has the coin in his collection for 13 years meanwhile taking it out from time to time to enjoy the pride of ownership.
Finally when over a dozen years have passed he sends the coin in and shazam! It grades as a proof worth not the current Greysheet of $3000 or $4000 but all of $200! He can't believe his eyes and sends it in again, same PR designation. Sucker!! Since both the numismatist who sold the coin and Anacs apparently couldn't tell the difference you can't put all the blame on the collector who previously relied on experts.
You should not have provided a personal guarantee on a slabbed coin you sold , but you did.
He should not have taken it out of the ANACS slab and voided their warranty, but he did.
Your offer to split the difference with him seems totally just to me.
IN the slab the coin is guaranteed. Guarantee void once coin taken out of slab. End of story.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
This has got to be one of the weirdest transactions I've ever seen. And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two? Both by getting the coin reslabbed and by having the guarantee re-written. He assumed he was getting one coin worth 10X what the far more common proof issue of the same year and type was worth. He has the coin in his collection for 13 years meanwhile taking it out from time to time to enjoy the pride of ownership.
Finally when over a dozen years have passed he sends the coin in and shazam! It grades as a proof worth not the current Greysheet of $3000 or $4000 but all of $200! He can't believe his eyes and sends it in again, same PR designation. Sucker!! Since both the numismatist who sold the coin and Anacs apparently couldn't tell the difference you can't put all the blame on the collector who previously relied on experts.
If I were the seller, I’m pretty sure I could refuse a return in good conscience. And there wouldn’t even be a need to place blame on the buyer. I’m also pretty sure that if you were the seller, you’d see things very differently than you do now.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@mr1874 said: You should not have provided a personal guarantee on a slabbed coin you sold , but you did.
He should not have taken it out of the ANACS slab and voided their warranty, but he did.
Your offer to split the difference with him seems totally just to me.
IN the slab the coin is guaranteed. Guarantee void once coin taken out of slab. End of story.
If I'm following the story correctly, the guarantee was intended to be made to the original buyer, not subsequent buyers. The problem lies in the language of the guarantee which reads "To Whom It May Concern" which could be interpreted as applying to any owner of the coin. I can see the next buyer honestly attempting to remedy a bad sale (proof vs ms) by availing themselves of the guarantee. I can also see them interpreting the guarantee to mean the authenticity of the coin as a regular issue instead of a proof, given the disparity in value and original sale as a regular issue. I also think the OP is being fair with his offer and hope it is accepted in kind. It's only money.
@logger7 said:
And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two?
I don't think anybody has said the buyer had an obligation to do any such thing. And the buyer created the mess in the first place by asking for a guarantee, getting one which appears to not be what he now wants it to be. So there's that.
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $534 and accept the return.
@savitale could you imagine how quick and severe Judge Judy would have this case over with? 😅 She would have a field day with it, and probably kick the buyer out within 5 minutes.
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
This has got to be one of the weirdest transactions I've ever seen. And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two? Both by getting the coin reslabbed and by having the guarantee re-written. He assumed he was getting one coin worth 10X what the far more common proof issue of the same year and type was worth. He has the coin in his collection for 13 years meanwhile taking it out from time to time to enjoy the pride of ownership.
Finally when over a dozen years have passed he sends the coin in and shazam! It grades as a proof worth not the current Greysheet of $3000 or $4000 but all of $200! He can't believe his eyes and sends it in again, same PR designation. Sucker!! Since both the numismatist who sold the coin and Anacs apparently couldn't tell the difference you can't put all the blame on the collector who previously relied on experts.
I'm not sure where exactly you're going here because you're bringing up the buyer having 13 years and taking my words to ask what they buyer could do in 2 months. All I was trying to convey is that the original guarantee doesn't cover this situation, but if the original buyer wanted this situation to have been covered, it should have been done more thoughtfully at the time of the original sale, with either better wording (after all, it was the buyer who requested the guarantee in the first place) or an agreed-upon action that would take place immediately following the sale, not an open-ended action that could take place any time over the next many decades.
@thebigeng said:
So you mean that you guaranteed that the coin was genuine unc. and the buyer thought it was a proof but bought it off you guarantee. If that was the understanding between the two of you then yes refund him. Otherwise no refund.
No. I sold him a coin that was (according to ANACS) UNC cleaned. The buyer bought it assuming it was UNC cleaned. I guaranteed "genuine" but I don't recall whether that was because he was worried that the coin was fake or whether he thought the coin might be proof.
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
This has got to be one of the weirdest transactions I've ever seen. And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two? Both by getting the coin reslabbed and by having the guarantee re-written. He assumed he was getting one coin worth 10X what the far more common proof issue of the same year and type was worth. He has the coin in his collection for 13 years meanwhile taking it out from time to time to enjoy the pride of ownership.
Finally when over a dozen years have passed he sends the coin in and shazam! It grades as a proof worth not the current Greysheet of $3000 or $4000 but all of $200! He can't believe his eyes and sends it in again, same PR designation. Sucker!! Since both the numismatist who sold the coin and Anacs apparently couldn't tell the difference you can't put all the blame on the collector who previously relied on experts.
I don't know that anyone is putting "all the blame on the collector". But clearly the collector believed it to be MS after having it in hand. So much so that he spent $400 trying to get it into an MS holder.
@savitale said:
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $586 and accept the return.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
...but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
Exactly.
On the face of it, you were guaranteeing that it was authentic, which has never been remotely questioned.
The deeper interpretation that someone could in theory try to make a legal case out of, is that you were guaranteeing that it was the same coin that ANACS had previously holdered, which it is.
Either way, you did not guarantee that ANACS was correct in their analysis or grade, and you did not guarantee that it was MS vs PR.
As I mentioned previously, as a practical matter, that piece of paper was essentially meaningless the day it was written.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
In that case, give him nothing. LOL.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
I’m actually glad to hear that he declined your offer. You did more than just about anyone in your position would have and I hope you give him nothing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think you did much much more than was required here, and I think many agree with me.
After thirteen years, no verification the coin was originally the one you sold, and the whole dispute being over a statement of "genuine" rather than "genuine circulation strike", you went above and beyond. That is a testament to your integrity as a seller, that's for sure.
@savitale said:
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $586 and accept the return.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
For a grading company such as Anacs to make a decision to call the coin a business strike worth 10X a proof issue is a significant one, how many graders were involved? Who at Anacs made that decision? "Coins that were certified by ANACS under previous ownership will be reholdered in the ANACS blue label. Coins that were certified since January 1, 2008, when ANACS began its new ownership, will be reholdered using the ANACS gold label".
The buyer has to have real evidence for his claim that the coin as sold on ebay is the same coin he wants a refund on. I'd tell him it is a complicated legal matter due to the amount of time that has passed, questions as to the coin he wants to make a claim on and in the future to contact your lawyer or have someone in the ANA mediate it which they do and which I have used.
Your note of a unrestricted return for the coin being genuine was was careless on your part. At the time of purchase it appears at issue was whether the coin was proof or business strike. Your offer to split the difference was more than fair, but you should bite the bullet and chalk it up as a learning experience and give the buyer a refund.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
I am amazed.
I had a receipt for the purchase of a 1916 SLQ from a dealer that I know very well.
His receipt said it could be returned for $X - no mention of time.
I decided to return it abut a year later.
He stated that his offer was for 6 months. I replied that he should have written that if that is what he meant.
We stayed friendly, and I have deal with him many times after that.
But... It still bothers me. And I try not to think about it.
As for you:
Block him, enough you have been very kind, and nicer than I would have been.
I like to deal with folks like you at any time.
Just the fact that you posted this to the forum and spent as much time answering all of these replies shows that you are a mensch.
@savitale said:
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $586 and accept the return.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
For a grading company such as Anacs to make a decision to call the coin a business strike worth 10X a proof issue is a significant one, how many graders were involved? Who at Anacs made that decision? "Coins that were certified by ANACS under previous ownership will be reholdered in the ANACS blue label. Coins that were certified since January 1, 2008, when ANACS began its new ownership, will be reholdered using the ANACS gold label".
The buyer has to have real evidence for his claim that the coin as sold on ebay is the same coin he wants a refund on. I'd tell him it is a complicated legal matter due to the amount of time that has passed, questions as to the coin he wants to make a claim on and in the future to contact your lawyer or have someone in the ANA mediate it which they do and which I have used.
What’s wrong with being practical? Your suggestion would make a far bigger deal out of the situation than is warranted. And involving an attorney would almost certainly be more costly and time consuming than buying the coin back - not that most of us think the seller has any legal or moral duty to do that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Based on his response he seems reasonably intelligent, but this comment stuck out:
Either honor your guarantee even within this convoluted situation, or don't because of this convoluted situation.
He is playing on your high level of personal integrity with that "honor your guarantee" comment.
If he had that same integrity he either never would have come back to you after 13 years or he would accept your unreasonably generous offer. I don't think he's dishonest, just married to some odd perception of the principle involved.
There are many things that he could have done differently, such as getting it slabbed 13 years ago. He is such a fan of keeping paper backup, did he print out the ebay listing? 🤔
Also, what other discussions preceeded the sale? They might have shed some light on what was intended on both sides. I am sure they are long since deleted.
You can't even be sure it's the same coin. It's been out of your hands for 13 years and it's even been out of his hands for a time.
Once again, the paper says the coin is genuine, nothing more. There is no hint of grade. If it later graded lower, would he have come back to you? Did he intend to pass the letter on to the new buyer to extend it to him, as well?
I suspect he figures that you'll break down and refund him the full amount. And I suspect he's right.
In general, people shouldn't confuse being generous or showing integrity with being a sucker.
@slider23 said:
Your note of a unrestricted return for the coin being genuine was was careless on your part. At the time of purchase it appears at issue was whether the coin was proof or business strike. Your offer to split the difference was more than fair, but you should bite the bullet and chalk it up as a learning experience and give the buyer a refund.
Not to split hairs but the coin IS genuine and even he believes it is the same coin that ANACS called MS 13 years ago. That was the only guarantee that I made... although I may end up buying the coin back just because I am uncomfortable with the whole situation.
@jmlanzaf
It is over. You made an offer, for your reasons and no one elses. It was not a fair offer as it was an unneeded offer. The buyer's remorse is nonsensical and should not have been considered. But you offered a ridiculous amount that the buyer should have jumped at. They did not. End of story, it is over. Move on with your life. You were above any one's expectations, so feel good about yourself and do not allow such an absurd buyer's request foul up your life. Best of luck.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
The OP is feeling strange about it because he posted the deal here and asked questions after 15 years. Most of us would not refund the buyer. I would in this case just to be done with it and probably not put stuff like this in writing ever again. I'm still thinking its good coin karma! I have no dog in this deal so no @MFeld ,I'm not going send anyone a check LOL!
It would be interesting if the coin, along with all the previous inserts and the letters(s), were neatly and professionally framed. I bet you dollar to donuts if that presentation were auctioned (along with a copy of this entire thread, just for kicks); it would garner more than the refund price.
I would be a player in the final 'bidding war.'
@braddick said:
It would be interesting if the coin, along with all the previous inserts and the letters(s), were neatly and professionally framed. I bet you dollar to donuts if that presentation were auctioned (along with a copy of this entire thread, just for kicks); it would garner more than the refund price.
I would be a player in the final 'bidding war.'
Auction it off at Christie's as the first NFT of a forum thread
Sorry to post once again but something just occurred to me that should hopefully bring @jmlanzaf to his senses.
That coin has been slabbed THREE times in the past several months by the buyer and his buyer.
The first was NGC, who determined it was a proof coin.
The second was PCGS, who also determined it was a proof coin.
Now, the buyer paid top dollar to get the top TPG's opinion. Yet what did he do? He cracked it out and sent it to ANACS!
The buyer by now knew it was a proof coin. Yet, he sent it back to ANACS hoping they would once again, 13 years later, misattribute it as MS
The buyer could only have done this for one reason - to sell a coin that he knew was misattributed in order to get money that he knew the coin wasn't worth.
13 years ago whatever happened was a combination of good faith and honest mistakes. If the buyer had come back to you after the first slabbing then he would have at least been showing his own good faith, albeit about a dozen years late.
However, what is happening now is something entirely different. He has a coin that is a verified PR that he has tried multiple times to get falsely classified as MS. Only when that scheme failed did he come back to you. His attempt to intentionally cheat someone today fell through so his backup plan is to go back 13 years to minimize his losses.
If it were me I'd drop that reality on him and retract my offer of any compensation.
@savitale said:
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $586 and accept the return.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
For a grading company such as Anacs to make a decision to call the coin a business strike worth 10X a proof issue is a significant one, how many graders were involved? Who at Anacs made that decision? "Coins that were certified by ANACS under previous ownership will be reholdered in the ANACS blue label. Coins that were certified since January 1, 2008, when ANACS began its new ownership, will be reholdered using the ANACS gold label".
The buyer has to have real evidence for his claim that the coin as sold on ebay is the same coin he wants a refund on. I'd tell him it is a complicated legal matter due to the amount of time that has passed, questions as to the coin he wants to make a claim on and in the future to contact your lawyer or have someone in the ANA mediate it which they do and which I have used.
What’s wrong with being practical? Your suggestion would make a far bigger deal out of the situation than is warranted. And involving an attorney would almost certainly be more costly and time consuming than buying the coin back - not that most of us think the seller has any legal or moral duty to do that.
The ANA mediation committee is a great option; I used it effectively against a coin doctor. It used to be cheap, but last I checked it was $100 or so. Those on the board are professionals on ethical considerations. There is too much upset on both sides to be resolved on a forum. As a former lawyer and one of the leading numismatists, Mark, you should know that evidence is critical for an unbiased decision. Also Legal Shield runs about $25/month, they will advise on legal cases and draft a letter for that, etc..
@braddick said:
It would be interesting if the coin, along with all the previous inserts and the letters(s), were neatly and professionally framed. I bet you dollar to donuts if that presentation were auctioned (along with a copy of this entire thread, just for kicks); it would garner more than the refund price.
I would be a player in the final 'bidding war.'
I was actually thinking something similar. I don’t think there is any obligation to buy it back but at this point he might as well. Then put it up for sale on the bst or eBay auction it with the entire story. It might not work out but you never know-maybe there will be some crazy bidding and best of all, peace of mind.
Sorry to post once again but something just occurred to me that should hopefully bring @jmlanzaf to his senses.
That coin has been slabbed THREE times in the past several months by the buyer and his buyer.
The first was NGC, who determined it was a proof coin.
The second was PCGS, who also determined it was a proof coin.
Now, the buyer paid top dollar to get the top TPG's opinion. Yet what did he do? He cracked it out and sent it to ANACS!
The buyer by now knew it was a proof coin. Yet, he sent it back to ANACS hoping they would once again, 13 years later, misattribute it as MS
The buyer could only have done this for one reason - to sell a coin that he knew was misattributed in order to get money that he knew the coin wasn't worth.
13 years ago whatever happened was a combination of good faith and honest mistakes. If the buyer had come back to you after the first slabbing then he would have at least been showing his own good faith, albeit about a dozen years late.
However, what is happening now is something entirely different. He has a coin that is a verified PR that he has tried multiple times to get falsely classified as MS. Only when that scheme failed did he come back to you. His attempt to intentionally cheat someone today fell through so his backup plan is to go back 13 years to minimize his losses.
If it were me I'd drop that reality on him and retract my offer of any compensation.
Playing devil’s advocate here - you’re speculating as to the person’s state of mind. You don’t “know” what it is.
He might believe that the coin is a business strike. He might know that grading companies don’t necessarily agree with the opinions of other grading companies. He might know that grading companies aren’t perfectly consistent in their numerical grading and in their assignments of designations such as “MS “ and PR”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Playing devil’s advocate here - you’re speculating as to the person’s state of mind. You don’t “know” what it is.
He might believe that the coin is a business strike. He might know that grading companies don’t necessarily agree with the opinions of other grading companies. He might know that grading companies aren’t perfectly consistent in their numerical grading and in their assignments of designations such as “MS “ and PR”.
@savitale said:
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $586 and accept the return.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
For a grading company such as Anacs to make a decision to call the coin a business strike worth 10X a proof issue is a significant one, how many graders were involved? Who at Anacs made that decision? "Coins that were certified by ANACS under previous ownership will be reholdered in the ANACS blue label. Coins that were certified since January 1, 2008, when ANACS began its new ownership, will be reholdered using the ANACS gold label".
The buyer has to have real evidence for his claim that the coin as sold on ebay is the same coin he wants a refund on. I'd tell him it is a complicated legal matter due to the amount of time that has passed, questions as to the coin he wants to make a claim on and in the future to contact your lawyer or have someone in the ANA mediate it which they do and which I have used.
What’s wrong with being practical? Your suggestion would make a far bigger deal out of the situation than is warranted. And involving an attorney would almost certainly be more costly and time consuming than buying the coin back - not that most of us think the seller has any legal or moral duty to do that.
The ANA mediation committee is a great option; I used it effectively against a coin doctor. It used to be cheap, but last I checked it was $100 or so. Those on the board are professionals on ethical considerations. There is too much upset on both sides to be resolved on a forum. As a former lawyer and one of the leading numismatists, Mark, you should know that evidence is critical for an unbiased decision. Also Legal Shield runs about $25/month, they will advise on legal cases and draft a letter for that, etc..
Did you see what the OP already offered to the buyer? Considering that, why would he spend the time and money for an ANA mediation instead of just buying the coin back at full price?
The issue won’t be resolved on this forum, nor should it be. But it makes for interesting reading and is thought provoking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@jmlanzaf I read most of this thread and believe that you are a stand up guy for sure.
Here is my take on it for what it's worth. I don't know if this has been said and I missed it, but here is how I would look at it if I wrote the guarantee.
Only @jmlanzaf knows in his heart and mind (if he remembers, as it's been 13 years) what he meant by his "guarantee" when he wrote it. He may be struggling with this now because he does not remember for sure, but he may have been guaranteeing the coin not only as genuine, but as genuine MS. If you do remember and you are sure you were only guaranteeing the coin as genuine without thought of business or proof strike, then you have gone above and beyond. On the other hand if there is a chance you where guaranteeing the business strike, then I would refund in full.
Either way you're a stand-up guy and I would definitely buy coins form you.
Sorry to post once again but something just occurred to me that should hopefully bring @jmlanzaf to his senses.
That coin has been slabbed THREE times in the past several months by the buyer and his buyer.
The first was NGC, who determined it was a proof coin.
The second was PCGS, who also determined it was a proof coin.
Now, the buyer paid top dollar to get the top TPG's opinion. Yet what did he do? He cracked it out and sent it to ANACS!
The buyer by now knew it was a proof coin. Yet, he sent it back to ANACS hoping they would once again, 13 years later, misattribute it as MS
The buyer could only have done this for one reason - to sell a coin that he knew was misattributed in order to get money that he knew the coin wasn't worth.
13 years ago whatever happened was a combination of good faith and honest mistakes. If the buyer had come back to you after the first slabbing then he would have at least been showing his own good faith, albeit about a dozen years late.
However, what is happening now is something entirely different. He has a coin that is a verified PR that he has tried multiple times to get falsely classified as MS. Only when that scheme failed did he come back to you. His attempt to intentionally cheat someone today fell through so his backup plan is to go back 13 years to minimize his losses.
If it were me I'd drop that reality on him and retract my offer of any compensation.
Playing devil’s advocate here - you’re speculating as to the person’s state of mind. You don’t “know” what it is.
He might believe that the coin is a business strike. He might know that grading companies don’t necessarily agree with the opinions of other grading companies. He might know that grading companies aren’t perfectly consistent in their numerical grading and in their assignments of designations such as “MS “ and PR”.
Yes, all very true. But based on what we know, the buyer has not been making a passionate claim that it is really MS. There was no mention of that in his response to the offer.
Any scenario is possible, but I am defaulting to Occam's Razor. It seems to me, in my opinion, that if the buyer could find someone to slab it as MS then he'd sell it onward, without any kind of guarantee of the type he is trying to exercise right now.
But who knows....
I always say I hate reality shows but here I am reading this thread.
@JBK said:
Sorry to post once again but something just occurred to me that should hopefully bring @jmlanzaf to his senses.
That coin has been slabbed THREE times in the past several months by the buyer and his buyer.
The first was NGC, who determined it was a proof coin.
The second was PCGS, who also determined it was a proof coin.
Now, the buyer paid top dollar to get the top TPG's opinion. Yet what did he do? He cracked it out and sent it to ANACS!
The buyer by now knew it was a proof coin. Yet, he sent it back to ANACS hoping they would once again, 13 years later, misattribute it as MS
The buyer could only have done this for one reason - to sell a coin that he knew was misattributed in order to get money that he knew the coin wasn't worth.
If it were me I'd drop that reality on him and retract my offer of any compensation.
As MFeld said, there is no need to retract the offer as it has been rejected.
@jmlanzaf said:
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
Where is the buyers accountability in this matter? What is the buyer bringing to the table?
People like this that want to hold everyone else accountable but take no responsibility for their own actions are a big part of the problems in society today.
They need to be told no and learn to accept it.
The coin fit the buyers needs for 13 years and they had use of the item, it was only when they tried to sell it that they were not happy.
When they sold the coin to another party your guarantee went out the window.
Help this person learn a life lesson, "You can't have your cake and eat it too."
Comments
They keep better records than you and I. Lol
However the assumption was that it was a genuine mintstate coin and the buyer bought it as such. People can use whatever legalese they want but no one in their right mind would buy a details coin worth maybe $50 at the time for over $500! The buyer relied upon the Anacs tab that stated it was an MS coin not a PR coin. The question continues to be what did the ebay listing state? That is what the contract was based on just as much if a dealer had an ad in Coin World for a raw 1884 3cn with the Anacs tab it was broken out of.
Did the buyer complain about not getting a details grade from his resubmission?
This is an important point. If he was worried about it being an authentic Mint product, then the guarantee is fine as-is, and you've met your obligation since that's not in doubt. If the intention was to guarantee the strike type (proof vs. business) then the buyer screwed up for accepting the guarantee you wrote. If I were the buyer looking for the latter guarantee and you sent what you did, I'd demand it be rewritten to specifically state that the coin is guaranteed to be a business strike coin. That wasn't done, and what is written is clear (even if not intended) and you owe nothing.
With that said, I also wouldn't write a lifetime guarantee on a strike type, especially for something where grading companies may differ between themselves or simply over time. Authenticity is fine to guarantee forever. For strike, I'd have offered to extend the return policy long enough for the coin to be submitted within X days of original delivery to an agreed-upon grading service, and once that decision is made, there is no further guarantee. This way, if there are any problems with the grade, everything is fresh in mind and the documentation easily at hand.
@Zoins posted:
"That being said, if you wanted the coin back, I think you would only need to pay the price that was paid to you 13 years ago, so even though the coin is a ANACS PF61 now, I'd only pay the MS60 Details/Cleaned price from 2009. This is assuming that a PF61 is worth a lot more today than the price paid 13 years ago."
The above is the correct thing to do, IMHOP.
Pete
That post was begging for a “Like” and “Agree” option!
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Unreasonable request. Tell him to...
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
This has got to be one of the weirdest transactions I've ever seen. And the buyer was supposed to clean up the mess in a month or two? Both by getting the coin reslabbed and by having the guarantee re-written. He assumed he was getting one coin worth 10X what the far more common proof issue of the same year and type was worth. He has the coin in his collection for 13 years meanwhile taking it out from time to time to enjoy the pride of ownership.
Finally when over a dozen years have passed he sends the coin in and shazam! It grades as a proof worth not the current Greysheet of $3000 or $4000 but all of $200! He can't believe his eyes and sends it in again, same PR designation. Sucker!! Since both the numismatist who sold the coin and Anacs apparently couldn't tell the difference you can't put all the blame on the collector who previously relied on experts.
You should not have provided a personal guarantee on a slabbed coin you sold , but you did.
He should not have taken it out of the ANACS slab and voided their warranty, but he did.
Your offer to split the difference with him seems totally just to me.
IN the slab the coin is guaranteed. Guarantee void once coin taken out of slab. End of story.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
If I were the seller, I’m pretty sure I could refuse a return in good conscience. And there wouldn’t even be a need to place blame on the buyer. I’m also pretty sure that if you were the seller, you’d see things very differently than you do now.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If I'm following the story correctly, the guarantee was intended to be made to the original buyer, not subsequent buyers. The problem lies in the language of the guarantee which reads "To Whom It May Concern" which could be interpreted as applying to any owner of the coin. I can see the next buyer honestly attempting to remedy a bad sale (proof vs ms) by availing themselves of the guarantee. I can also see them interpreting the guarantee to mean the authenticity of the coin as a regular issue instead of a proof, given the disparity in value and original sale as a regular issue. I also think the OP is being fair with his offer and hope it is accepted in kind. It's only money.
I don't think anybody has said the buyer had an obligation to do any such thing. And the buyer created the mess in the first place by asking for a guarantee, getting one which appears to not be what he now wants it to be. So there's that.
I agree that after 13 years it is very poor form for the buyer to invoke the guarantee. Especially for what amounts to less than $400 net. I also think that in a court of law, the seller would win.
At the same time, I suspect the intent at the time was to guarantee that the coin was mint state. I doubt someone (especially back then) would go through the trouble of asking for a letter, on top of the 3rd party authentication, that the coin was simply not counterfeit. That the letter doesn't say that either reflects a very clever slight-of-hand by the seller (I doubt it) or just a bit of sloppiness that probably made sense in the context of other communication.
If I were concerned enough about what was "the right thing to do" to start this thread, I would probably refund the $534 and accept the return.
LIBERTY SEATED DIMES WITH MAJOR VARIETIES CIRCULATION STRIKES (1837-1891) digital album
@savitale could you imagine how quick and severe Judge Judy would have this case over with? 😅 She would have a field day with it, and probably kick the buyer out within 5 minutes.
https://www.the4thcoin.com
https://www.ebay.com/str/thefourthcoin
I'm not sure where exactly you're going here because you're bringing up the buyer having 13 years and taking my words to ask what they buyer could do in 2 months. All I was trying to convey is that the original guarantee doesn't cover this situation, but if the original buyer wanted this situation to have been covered, it should have been done more thoughtfully at the time of the original sale, with either better wording (after all, it was the buyer who requested the guarantee in the first place) or an agreed-upon action that would take place immediately following the sale, not an open-ended action that could take place any time over the next many decades.
I don't know that anyone is putting "all the blame on the collector". But clearly the collector believed it to be MS after having it in hand. So much so that he spent $400 trying to get it into an MS holder.
Actually, there is a 3rd possibility. Based on the language, sloppy though it may be, the letter was guaranteeing that the coin and the label went together. Remember, the coin was already out of the holder when sold. It is a very fine line that should almost qualify me for a law degree, but the letter is not guaranteeing the coin to be MS but guaranteeing the coin to be the one that ANACS called MS.
It is worth noting that ANACS response to the customer was that their "current research" indicates the coin to be Proof which suggests that they may have changed their opinion over 13 to 15 years.
Exactly.
On the face of it, you were guaranteeing that it was authentic, which has never been remotely questioned.
The deeper interpretation that someone could in theory try to make a legal case out of, is that you were guaranteeing that it was the same coin that ANACS had previously holdered, which it is.
Either way, you did not guarantee that ANACS was correct in their analysis or grade, and you did not guarantee that it was MS vs PR.
As I mentioned previously, as a practical matter, that piece of paper was essentially meaningless the day it was written.
Is is worth trying to reach out to ANACS asking them to confirm that they would have likely classified the coin as a business strike when it was originally slabbed by them? If so, that should hopefully put the nail in the coffin of the argument with the buyer. IMHO, I can't believe the buyer is even coming back to you after this long.
I can believe it. What I'm a little surprised at is that he refused my compromise offer of $400. He's willing to take nothing or $534 but not $400?????
In that case, give him nothing. LOL.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I’m actually glad to hear that he declined your offer. You did more than just about anyone in your position would have and I hope you give him nothing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You cannot be sure it is even the same coin.
You cannot be sure it is the same owner.
This is some shady stuff... TBH
You made an offer... give him 48 hours and be done with him
BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out
The other party declined the offer, so there’s no need to give him any additional time.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think you did much much more than was required here, and I think many agree with me.
After thirteen years, no verification the coin was originally the one you sold, and the whole dispute being over a statement of "genuine" rather than "genuine circulation strike", you went above and beyond. That is a testament to your integrity as a seller, that's for sure.
Coin Photographer.
For a grading company such as Anacs to make a decision to call the coin a business strike worth 10X a proof issue is a significant one, how many graders were involved? Who at Anacs made that decision? "Coins that were certified by ANACS under previous ownership will be reholdered in the ANACS blue label. Coins that were certified since January 1, 2008, when ANACS began its new ownership, will be reholdered using the ANACS gold label".
The buyer has to have real evidence for his claim that the coin as sold on ebay is the same coin he wants a refund on. I'd tell him it is a complicated legal matter due to the amount of time that has passed, questions as to the coin he wants to make a claim on and in the future to contact your lawyer or have someone in the ANA mediate it which they do and which I have used.
Your note of a unrestricted return for the coin being genuine was was careless on your part. At the time of purchase it appears at issue was whether the coin was proof or business strike. Your offer to split the difference was more than fair, but you should bite the bullet and chalk it up as a learning experience and give the buyer a refund.
I am amazed.
I had a receipt for the purchase of a 1916 SLQ from a dealer that I know very well.
His receipt said it could be returned for $X - no mention of time.
I decided to return it abut a year later.
He stated that his offer was for 6 months. I replied that he should have written that if that is what he meant.
We stayed friendly, and I have deal with him many times after that.
But... It still bothers me. And I try not to think about it.
As for you:
Block him, enough you have been very kind, and nicer than I would have been.
I like to deal with folks like you at any time.
Just the fact that you posted this to the forum and spent as much time answering all of these replies shows that you are a mensch.
BHNC #203
What’s wrong with being practical? Your suggestion would make a far bigger deal out of the situation than is warranted. And involving an attorney would almost certainly be more costly and time consuming than buying the coin back - not that most of us think the seller has any legal or moral duty to do that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Based on his response he seems reasonably intelligent, but this comment stuck out:
He is playing on your high level of personal integrity with that "honor your guarantee" comment.
If he had that same integrity he either never would have come back to you after 13 years or he would accept your unreasonably generous offer. I don't think he's dishonest, just married to some odd perception of the principle involved.
There are many things that he could have done differently, such as getting it slabbed 13 years ago. He is such a fan of keeping paper backup, did he print out the ebay listing? 🤔
Also, what other discussions preceeded the sale? They might have shed some light on what was intended on both sides. I am sure they are long since deleted.
You can't even be sure it's the same coin. It's been out of your hands for 13 years and it's even been out of his hands for a time.
Once again, the paper says the coin is genuine, nothing more. There is no hint of grade. If it later graded lower, would he have come back to you? Did he intend to pass the letter on to the new buyer to extend it to him, as well?
I suspect he figures that you'll break down and refund him the full amount. And I suspect he's right.
In general, people shouldn't confuse being generous or showing integrity with being a sucker.
Not to split hairs but the coin IS genuine and even he believes it is the same coin that ANACS called MS 13 years ago. That was the only guarantee that I made... although I may end up buying the coin back just because I am uncomfortable with the whole situation.
@jmlanzaf
It is over. You made an offer, for your reasons and no one elses. It was not a fair offer as it was an unneeded offer. The buyer's remorse is nonsensical and should not have been considered. But you offered a ridiculous amount that the buyer should have jumped at. They did not. End of story, it is over. Move on with your life. You were above any one's expectations, so feel good about yourself and do not allow such an absurd buyer's request foul up your life. Best of luck.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
The OP is feeling strange about it because he posted the deal here and asked questions after 15 years. Most of us would not refund the buyer. I would in this case just to be done with it and probably not put stuff like this in writing ever again. I'm still thinking its good coin karma! I have no dog in this deal so no @MFeld ,I'm not going send anyone a check LOL!
@jmlanzaf "I may end up buying the coin back just because I am uncomfortable with the whole situation."
Don't do it, your offer was more than fair, walk away.
Send your buyer a link to this thread so they see that the majority feels they are out of line.
It would be interesting if the coin, along with all the previous inserts and the letters(s), were neatly and professionally framed. I bet you dollar to donuts if that presentation were auctioned (along with a copy of this entire thread, just for kicks); it would garner more than the refund price.
I would be a player in the final 'bidding war.'
peacockcoins
Auction it off at Christie's as the first NFT of a forum thread
I just thought of an idea which will insure that he won’t refund the buyer and instead, will just walk away. Everyone, please post this to the thread:
“@jmlanzaf, you have no choice but to refund the buyer in full. And you may not walk away until you have done so.”
He won’t be able to resist taking the other side.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I like that @jmlanzaf posted this thread. I would buy a coin from him, he seems like a good guy trying to do the right thing..
Sorry to post once again but something just occurred to me that should hopefully bring @jmlanzaf to his senses.
That coin has been slabbed THREE times in the past several months by the buyer and his buyer.
The first was NGC, who determined it was a proof coin.
The second was PCGS, who also determined it was a proof coin.
Now, the buyer paid top dollar to get the top TPG's opinion. Yet what did he do? He cracked it out and sent it to ANACS!
The buyer by now knew it was a proof coin. Yet, he sent it back to ANACS hoping they would once again, 13 years later, misattribute it as MS
The buyer could only have done this for one reason - to sell a coin that he knew was misattributed in order to get money that he knew the coin wasn't worth.
13 years ago whatever happened was a combination of good faith and honest mistakes. If the buyer had come back to you after the first slabbing then he would have at least been showing his own good faith, albeit about a dozen years late.
However, what is happening now is something entirely different. He has a coin that is a verified PR that he has tried multiple times to get falsely classified as MS. Only when that scheme failed did he come back to you. His attempt to intentionally cheat someone today fell through so his backup plan is to go back 13 years to minimize his losses.
If it were me I'd drop that reality on him and retract my offer of any compensation.
The ANA mediation committee is a great option; I used it effectively against a coin doctor. It used to be cheap, but last I checked it was $100 or so. Those on the board are professionals on ethical considerations. There is too much upset on both sides to be resolved on a forum. As a former lawyer and one of the leading numismatists, Mark, you should know that evidence is critical for an unbiased decision. Also Legal Shield runs about $25/month, they will advise on legal cases and draft a letter for that, etc..
I was actually thinking something similar. I don’t think there is any obligation to buy it back but at this point he might as well. Then put it up for sale on the bst or eBay auction it with the entire story. It might not work out but you never know-maybe there will be some crazy bidding and best of all, peace of mind.
L> @JBK said:
Playing devil’s advocate here - you’re speculating as to the person’s state of mind. You don’t “know” what it is.
He might believe that the coin is a business strike. He might know that grading companies don’t necessarily agree with the opinions of other grading companies. He might know that grading companies aren’t perfectly consistent in their numerical grading and in their assignments of designations such as “MS “ and PR”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
peacockcoins
Did you see what the OP already offered to the buyer? Considering that, why would he spend the time and money for an ANA mediation instead of just buying the coin back at full price?
The issue won’t be resolved on this forum, nor should it be. But it makes for interesting reading and is thought provoking.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@jmlanzaf I read most of this thread and believe that you are a stand up guy for sure.
Here is my take on it for what it's worth. I don't know if this has been said and I missed it, but here is how I would look at it if I wrote the guarantee.
Only @jmlanzaf knows in his heart and mind (if he remembers, as it's been 13 years) what he meant by his "guarantee" when he wrote it. He may be struggling with this now because he does not remember for sure, but he may have been guaranteeing the coin not only as genuine, but as genuine MS. If you do remember and you are sure you were only guaranteeing the coin as genuine without thought of business or proof strike, then you have gone above and beyond. On the other hand if there is a chance you where guaranteeing the business strike, then I would refund in full.
Either way you're a stand-up guy and I would definitely buy coins form you.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
Yes, all very true. But based on what we know, the buyer has not been making a passionate claim that it is really MS. There was no mention of that in his response to the offer.
Any scenario is possible, but I am defaulting to Occam's Razor. It seems to me, in my opinion, that if the buyer could find someone to slab it as MS then he'd sell it onward, without any kind of guarantee of the type he is trying to exercise right now.
But who knows....
I always say I hate reality shows but here I am reading this thread.
I want to hear the other guy's argument now
As MFeld said, there is no need to retract the offer as it has been rejected.
Where is the buyers accountability in this matter? What is the buyer bringing to the table?
People like this that want to hold everyone else accountable but take no responsibility for their own actions are a big part of the problems in society today.
They need to be told no and learn to accept it.
The coin fit the buyers needs for 13 years and they had use of the item, it was only when they tried to sell it that they were not happy.
When they sold the coin to another party your guarantee went out the window.
Help this person learn a life lesson, "You can't have your cake and eat it too."