Extra thick holder not listed among PCGS holders

OcelotsR_Us

Recently received a no-charge "reholder" submission for two coins, the first housed in a standard holder and the other housed in a 12mm thick holder:

The explanation received for the thicker holder was:

Alexa Garcia (Collectors Universe)
Jan 17, 2023, 08:29 PST

Hello,

For the safety of the coin, our team has placed this in a thicker holder.

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Thank you,

Alexa
PCGS Customer Service

This was puzzling since I've had 16 coins housed in standard holders having the identical dimensions, 37mm diameter, 925 silver, 33.63g, and 3.05mm thickness, since 2017, not including the original "reholder" which was also housed in a standard holder:

Since it's my policy not to list coins with ridiculously oversized holders, and since it's very unlucky to submit the same certification twice for a mechanical error, requested a refund for the holder. Another service will ultimately house this coin in a standard holder.

This was the response:

Alexa Garcia
(Collectors Universe)
Jan 17, 2023, 13:48 PST

Hello,

We cannot process a refund for this as it is serviced accordingly.
Our team encapsulated your item as they saw fit to protect the coin.

Thank you,
Alexa
PCGS Customer Service

(Added emphasis my own.)

Have an additional 13 coins that were damaged in storage because they were not contained in protector bags. Eventually, friction caused some holders to chafe in their hard plastic Lighthouse Encap albums.

Would coins of this submission also be housed in holders of varying thicknesses and have their orientations reversed at random?

Namvet69

Were you supposed to choose the type and size holder you wanted? On the submission form?

OcelotsR_Us

On the form, the only options are for First Strike, TrueView, Variety Attribution, and Oversized holder. If rehousing an oversized holder, and the "oversized" option is not checked, your submission lands in "problem orders."

Rehousing a damaged holder shouldn't require comment, and there isn't space for comments on the form:

No comments were provided and the coin holder was standard sized when rehoused. The original mechanical error email was concerned about the flipping of the orientation, not of the holder dimensions:

For crossover coins, there is a restoration option on the PDF form, which is an added service that only PCGS can offer, since restoration services are performed by PCGS itself.

PeakRarities

I don't know how to help you with this but if you were to post in the "world coin" forum you would get more answers. Not a lot of traffic in the "Q&A" forum

OcelotsR_Us

Yah, Dan, I'm thinking this holder scenario wouldn't have played out with US Coins.

It's been a constant battle with the PCGS international graders not to reverse the orientation of the coins. Regardless of the subject of the coin identified by the PCGS label, the grader places the side of the coin having the national coat arms in the obverse position, not the side having the subject.

For example:

The colorized surface of the coin, with the subject "Playa de las Catedrales," is the surface presented by the Spanish Royal Mint in its advertisement:

This coin was reholdered due to wear marks sustained in storage, now placed a protector bag.

Reordering the coin is especially problematic when it is part of a set of coins:

Note that the subject of the coin is "Cathedrals Beach," not "The Coats of Arms of the Nine Nations:"

Most of my submissions have had orientation reversals for which I have spent many hours of my time defending.

I allege that the grader, having been constantly being overruled by the evidence of precedent and mint packaging, chose to retaliate in a way that no one could question, by placing the coin in an oversized holder.

If PCGS does not admit culpability in the use of the oversized holder, I question whether it is worth my continued time and effort to do business with PCGS.

OcelotsR_Us

These are the images that mysteriously disappeared from the my first post: