Ethics question about identifying problems when selling coins
clw54
Posts: 3,815 ✭✭✭
If somebody sends a coin in to PCGS and it comes back in a body bag as cleaned or whizzed, should the person identify the problem when selling that coin on eBay?
0
Comments
Like my ASE- PCGS slabbed it, NGC bagged it... there is no doubt in my mind that it is original.
Jeremy
As for me I will state that I always tell people if I believe there is something amiss with a coin. I had several ebay auctions going a few weeks ago and they were for Bust halves and in each one I stated the problems that I thought the coin had. I also tell people at shows if I sell a coin raw or slabbed what factors the coin brings with it, in my opinion. I even include any cross over history with the coin. Even though I do this I still would not hold it against others if they did not.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
So, it proves to me that I'm the one that is usually right. If there is a problem that I am aware of, I do feel obligated to full disclosure. Why go through the hassle of returns, bad feelings, etc. If one has got by me, I always taken the piece back for a full refund.
I have an opposite situation....sent a couple of circ CC Morgans into NGC, which got body bagged for cleaning. Sent them off to ANACS expecting to get some net grades....got a straight up EF and VF on them. Naturally, I'm thrilled...but always in the back of my mind I'll wonder (and I'll always look real hard at any circ ANACS coins I might be considering)
Tyler
Counterfiets.... well I will not say anything about them untill I find the 1923D Dime that has been searched for forever.
Cleaned and hairlined coins. They are a fact of life. No problem with them as long as they are described correctly.
Over Graded Slabbed Coins. Have taken lumps here also. If its a Dog you should describe it as a Dog.
Ken
If a seller places a coin in a 2x2 and writes a price on it, then it is up to the buyer to make sure the coin doesn't have any problems.
If a seller were to write on the 2x2 "Problem free" or something like that, then it would be unethical. Same as with asking the dealer if it is problem free and him lying.
If the coin is slabbed (by a legit service), then it is fine not to mention any problems you may think the coin has. After all, the buyer is buying the coin with the guarantee and reputation of the grading service behind it.
Too often I've had a coin bagged by one of the services only to be slabbed on the next try. Should I reveal the previous bagging? I've had a gold coin come back counterfeit, yet it got slabbed twice by ANACS. Should I reveal that PCGS thought the coin was counterfeit, yet ANACS didn't twice?
If you were on the buying end of the transaction, would you want the information disclosed prior to your purchasing the coin? Of course you wouldn't. We all dream of submitting our MS 67 Seated coin to one of the grading services in hope of getting a body bag for whizzing. The fact that this question is even being pondered illustrates the primary problem the hobby has had for decades...even longer.
If my response offends anyone, then GOOD, it is intended to offend those that continue to peddle coins. Take the hit, learn the lesson and do the right thing.
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
Thomas Paine
<< <i>if somebody sends a coin in to PCGS and it comes back in a body bag as cleaned or whizzed, should the person identify the problem when selling that coin on eBay? >>
. NOT necessary, imo. simply offer your honest opinion as to its value, & a return policy. that allows the potential buyer to be buying it sight-seen, which is how coins should be bought in the 1st place.
pcgs has expressed their opinion, but you are completely entitled to YOURS as well, & the potential buyer is entitled to HIS/HERS too.
K S
If I don't see it, then why should I hurt myself based on a third party opinion that I don't agree with? PCGS is not perfect. NGC is not perfect. ANACS is not perfect.
Describe the coin as best you can and offer a 100% refund.
I've bought from folks who overgrade and undergrade. Some don't mention digs and corrosion. I think they they should. It's an obvious problem. I'm not sure what bagged means but is sounds like they wouldn't grade it for some reason.
Coupla folks mentioned here that if you disagree and so does another reputable grader then maybe they wouldn't mention it. I gotta agree, its one graders opinion against yours and another. My guess is some of these hired graders are not near as compitent as many collectors.
Best cure for this problem is a real good picture.
JM(PCGS certified newby)O, mike
W.C. Fields
Casabrown
Anyway, without being judgemental about the ethics of this, I'm hesitant to buy raw coins from this guy other than $10 common stuff.
i'd side w/ the dealer on this 1.
K S
I have a car I want to sell. I take it to my mechanic for an oil change and discover that the engine has metal shavings in the oil pan. My dealer's opinion is that the bearings are shot and I'm looking at a new motor in the near future.
This problem will definately have an impact on the value of my car if I disclose this to any perspective buyer.
OK, I get it now. All I have to do is keep my mouth shut and tell the guy who buys it from me and later calls about the engine going south..."sorry, you had a chance to inspect the car, you bought it."
Yeah, that's the right thing to do.
Some of you guys have a twisted sense of what is right. I hope you get back in spades what you advocate.
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
Thomas Paine
No, you don't have it right. Your analogy isn't even close.
1) Problem with coins are often opinions. A mechanical problem with a car is easier to verify.
2) The people who are advocating selling the coin, are saying to do so only if you don't agree with the opinion. Not hide something that YOU know is wrong with it.
3) You analogy offers no return. Everyone who has said to sell the coin agreed that a full refund should be offered if the buyer doesn't like it.
Don't get worked up about it. Some of us aren't the horrible people we're made out to be by misreading the thread.
THE LAW AND ITS APPLICATION
[1] Here the obvious intention of the sellers was to sell the home in "as is" condition with no warranty as to the home's critical elements. The buyer, fully aware of these terms, agreed to the deal as proposed.
The buyer relies chiefly on Johnson v. Davis, 480 So.2d 625 (Fla.1985) which provides: "where the seller of a home knows of facts materially affecting the value of the property which are not readily observable and are not known to the buyer, the seller is under a duty to disclose them to the buyer." Id. at 629. In this case the buyer contends that the sellers knew of the defects in the home including the swimming pool and central air conditioning, and that those defects materially affected the value of the property. However the buyer overlooks a critical part of Johnson's much cited holding, wherein the case requiring recovery is limited to those conditions "which are not readily observable and are not known to the buyer " Id.
[2] This distinction is outlined in Besett v. Basnett, 389 So.2d 995, 997 (Fla.1980), as cited in Johnson. Besett refers to Section 541 Restatement Second of Torts and is especially applicable to the instant situation:
s. Representation Known to Be or Obviously False.
The recipient of a fraudulent misrepresentation is not justified in relying upon its truth if he knows that it is false or its falsity is obvious to him.
Comment:
a. Although the recipient of a fraudulent misrepresentation is not barred from recovery because he could have discovered its falsity if he had shown his distrust of the maker's honesty by investigating its truth, he is nonetheless required to use his senses, and cannot recover if he blindly relies upon a misrepresentation the falsity of which would be patent to him if he had utilized his opportunity to make a cursory examination or investigation. Thus, if one induces another to buy a horse by representing it to be sound, the purchaser cannot recover even though the horse has but one eye, if the horse is shown to the purchaser before he buys it and the slightest inspection would have disclosed the defect. (Emphasis added.)
The facts disclosed in the instant case leave no doubt that the home in this case was the functional equivalent of a one eyed horse, and recovery is barred under Johnson, Besett, and the Restatement. See Wasser v. Sasoni, 652 So.2d 411 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(concluding a misrepresentation is not actionable where its truth might have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence). See also Steinberg v. Bay Terrace Apartment Hotel, Inc., 375 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); *361 Welbourn v. Cohen, 104 So.2d 380 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958).
"A buyer must take reasonable steps to ascertain the material facts relating to the property and to discover them--if, of course, they are reasonably ascertainable." Nelson v. Wiggs, 699 So.2d 258, 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (concluding seller had no duty to disclose seasonal flooding as the information that the property is subject to seasonal flooding was available to the buyers through diligent attention), review denied, 705 So.2d 570 (Fla.1998). See also Gilchrist Timber Co. v. ITT Rayonier, Inc., 696 So.2d 334, 339 (Fla.1997). Just as we concluded that buyer Nelson had the opportunity to discover the facts at issue for himself, we likewise conclude the instant buyer had the opportunity to discover all that she complained about in her actions against these sellers. See Rosique v. Windley Cove, Ltd., 542 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Here, the parties closed on a contract that featured a prominent "as is" clause. The buyer closed while possessing inspections that patently warned of latent defects to the pool and of an air conditioning system that had not been tested, and in fact received some credits for these matters at closing. She freely elected to close on the purchase contract and is now bound by its terms.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
put it another way, some folks consider any toning at all to be a "problem" (ie they want "blast white"). i do not.
greghansen's analogty does not work either, for the same reason. a house that is about to fall apart - it's a fact that the house has problems, not an opinion.
K S