Error in auction listing--is it my fault? (ISSUE RESOLVED)

RYK

In an auction last year, I purchased an 1846-O $10 NGC-45. The coin was okay for the grade, and I tucked it away with my other O Mint $10's. Recently, I pulled it out and sent to a well-known rare gold coin dealer with the intent of trading it toward another purchase. He informed me that the coin I had was really an 1846/5-O. Sure enough, I received the coin back today, checked it in the definitive resource for New Orleans gold coins, and plain as day (if you know what you are looking for ), it is the overdate.

Do I have any recourse and with whom? The auctioneer? NGC? The dealer/expert who informed me that I was sold a misattributed coin? Or is it my own darn fault for not knowing all the nuances of the series I collect? BTW, the price difference in Trends for the XF-45 is $850, with the overdate being the less expensive variety.

Shamika

An overdate that is less expensive than the none overdate? Interesting.

kranky

That's a very interesting situation. Normally, there's no expectation for a seller to identify whether a coin is a variety. I see your point, though, in that the so-called variety is worth less than the "normal" coin.

Is failure to attribute a coin the same thing as "misattribution"? I would say no.

IMHO, you didn't get screwed. The coin is indeed an 1846-O $10. It's just not the specific variety (or non-variety, in your case) you were expecting.

The only similar situation I can think of quickly is the 1879-CC capped die. The normal die is worth more than the "capped die". But both are still 1879-CC coins.

jbsteven

I would think NGC would have to pay up since the holder is wrong.

RYK

I would think NGC would have to pay up since the holder is wrong.

I called NGC, and they told me that attribution is not guaranteed and that I should take it up with the seller. I am waiting to hear back from the seller.

UncleJoe

Do you have your story in reverse? The overdate is more valuable according to PCGS.

Joe.

RYK

Do you have your story in reverse? The overdate is more valuable according to PCGS.

No, I am quite positive. Per Trends, the overdate is considerably less valuable than the normal date. Even the auction company will affirm that.

I have spoken to a representative of the auction company (presently nameless), and they are considering what to do. The representative tried to tell me that Coin Values is meaningless and not representative of pricing for the issue. I told him that while that may be true, the auctioneer listed Coin Values/Trends pricing with the auction item and listed the more expensive 46-O (normal date) pricing.

coinlieutenant

Robert,

I really dont know what to tell you on that one. I think that the seller should pay for some of the difference. The remainder you might have to eat... I dont think that NGC will pay for it...

I would say that it might be one to chalk up to a learning experience although I would at least try to get the money back first of course...

Just prepare yourself for the possiblity...

John

Rittenhouse

<< <i>[I have spoken to a representative of the auction company (presently nameless), and they are considering what to do. The representative tried to tell me that Coin Values is meaningless and not representative of pricing for the issue. I told him that while that may be true, the auctioneer listed Coin Values/Trends pricing with the auction item and listed the more expensive 46-O (normal date) pricing. >>



You should have stated the full case in your orig post.

Anyway, based on your statement, end of story. Auction company listed as normal date referencing price premium. Ergo they were representing and attributing the coin as a normal date. They are therefore responsible. Co. should refund in full and take the coin back. No negotiation on price diff - too subjective. Full refund for returned coin.

RYK

Anyway, based on your statement, end of story. Auction company listed as normal date referencing price premium. Ergo they were representing and attributing the coin as a normal date. They are therefore responsible. Co. should refund in full and take the coin back.

This is, obviously, my position. I will let the message board know how it turns out.

Conder101

Nope, the auction company is also off the hook (most likely). Usually you have a limited time in which to request a return. After that time returns are usually only allowed for reasons of authenticity. Authenticity is not in question here. They said it was an 1846-O $10 and it is a genuine 1846-O $10. It just happens to be an 1846/5-O $10 but it is still a 46-O. This is a case of a misattribution and that is usually NOT covered in most auction terms.

Barry

Agree with Conder. I once had a somewhat similar situation, where I didn't look closely at the coin for a while. Auction house was willing to re-auction the coin at no cost to me (I got hammer + the 15%). If it was within 30 days, they would have refunded my money. Even though I lost money, I think that was a reasonable thing for them to do.

Russ

<< <i>I called NGC, and they told me that attribution is not guaranteed and that I should take it up with the seller. >>



NGC copped out? That can't be. After all, they are the be all end all of customer service - just ask anybody over at sleepy hollow. Are you sure it isn't a PCGS coin?

Russ, NCNE

RYK

This is taken from the auctioneer's own auction terms:

In the event of an attribution error, the Auctioneer may, at the Auctioneer's sole discretion, correct the error on the Internet, or, if discovered at a later date, to refund the buyer's money without further obligation. Under no circumstances shall the obligation of the Auctioneer to any Bidder be in excess of the purchase price for any lot in dispute.

There is no time limit stated or inferred in this statement. It is a separate item, not taken out of any context.

The auctioneer has a team of professional numismatists who are responsible for attributing the coins. I am not one. If you purchased a diamond from a jeweler that was sold to you as a E color, and upon the review of other professional jewelers it was found to be consensus I color, I think that the jeweler would likely be on the hook for the mistake no matter when it was discovered. (I do not know anything about diamonds, I hope this analogy is close.)

Russ

RYK,

The key phrase is:



<< <i>at the Auctioneer's sole discretion >>



That says they may, but are under no obligation to.

Russ, NCNE

Conder101

Correct. It says that they may correct the error, if they chose to, by refunding your money. If they are a large reputable auction house they probably will, if they aren't don't hold your breath.

coinkat

There may not be fault under these circumstances... NGC offers a service which provides an opinion as to the grade of the coin. NGC did that by grading the coin EF-45. NCG and some other grading services provide a grading service that does not include varieties... I'm sorry to have to write this but it is true. I have seen fairly tough varieties that have been graded that lack attribution. Why? Because there has been little interest among those that control the coin market for whatever reason. Perhaps the interest is beginning to increase as more collectors learn more and seek certain varieties that are scarce and worth a premium.

In light of the fact that this was an auction, I doubt that there is much that can be done because it would be expected that bidders would have the opportunity to inspect the lots before auction. It almost boils down to a buyer beware situation. In any event, an 1846-0 6/5 10 Lib is still a nice coin to own. There are some lawyers that may offer opinion a more insightful opinion here such as Frattlaw... good luck with your efforts.

MICHAELDIXON

RYK,
I thought you were an attorney!

RYK

I thought you were an attorney!

No, I am an MD (like you ).

tradedollarnut

So let me get this straight so I understand completely. A recognized variety on the label is not guaranteed? What's next... the grade as well?

Caveat Emptor.

coinkat

TDN:

While I have the greatest respect for your numismatic insight, I have to say I have seen my share of varieties that should be recognized by certain TPG companies that will remain nameless that were not attributed on slabs but graded nonetheless. This is a partial list: 1946 WLH DDR, 1921-D Morgan TRU_T VAM1A, 1882-O/S EDS examples, 1887-O DOUBLE DATE VAM 2, 1901 Morgan DDR, 1918-D WLH no initials. I could list other examples if I spent more time thinking about it. And I apologize that I even have to list what I have because there should be attribution for these because of their significance.

wayneherndon

TDN, actually opposite problem in this case. The variety was not noted on the holder.

WH

tradedollarnut

In the Registry, NGC shows the 6/5 as being scored slightly higher. CU shows the variety as being worth more. Trends shows the variety being worth more in many grades - including XF40.

In fact, Trends value jumps from $700 to $2400 between XF40 to XF45 [that don't seem right - a quick scan shows NO other date jumping that much percentage wise] for the regular date, but only from $1050 to $1550 for the overdate. Something seems amiss in those numbers.

Overall, I'd say Trends is messed up in XF45 and AU50 and that's the root cause of the problem. But it does concern me that we collectors need to guess what on the label is guaranteed and what is not!

RYK

If this was a coin purchased on ebay from an "estate" or from a "little old lady's dead husband's collection", I would (obviously) be out of luck. I purchased this coin from a large firm that regularly touts its numismatic expertise and clout. They missed the variety, as well, and provided reference pricing for the more expensive variety. If the coin were purchased from a dealer (not auction), I would expect the dealer to make good on the coin and most would. We will see how this turns out at the auction company.

Conder101

<< <i>But it does concern me that we collectors need to guess what on the label is guaranteed and what is not! >>


As I have said before, read the guarantee. The only thing specificly guaranteed is the grade. (In fact the only thing mentioned or discussed is the grade. Not authenticity, not attributions, just the grade.)

SethChandler

RYK, Let's see a picture!

Seth

RYK

Seth,

I am not home (slowwwww day at work), so I do not have the coin to scan. I doubt that I will be able to photograph the date such that the overdate is visible. It is not a naked eye overdate. The diagnostic sign is the round lump of the "knee" of the "5" within the round part of the "6". It is positively there. Until I checked it in the book, I was not sure how to make the determination.

Robert

RYK

I have contacted the folks at Heritage, and they have agreed to take the coin back and refund the purchase price to me.

I think that Heritage should get credit for doing the right thing. They might not be contractually obligated (and they might be--we could let the lawyers argue it) to buy it back, but it is never the appropriate thing to bury a retail client in a coin, and they obviously recognize that. Thanks, Heritage!

ealandg

I once bought a draped bust dime from them at auction that was billed as undamaged, but as soon as I received it I saw that it was. They were very gracious about refunding me my money.

They are a little overpriced, but OK in my book.

coinkat

Glad to hear things were resolved. My experiences with Heritage have been excellent.

RYK

Finally, here's a scan of the coin. As you can see, the lower half of the ball of the 6 is filled in somewhat by the knee of the 5. I guess it really is a naked eye overdate. You just have to know what you are looking for. (Plug for the dealers coming up...) More than any other personal example I have had, this case illustrates the advantage of buying coins from a knowledgeable dealer and establishing a good relationship with such a dealer. I will never stray again!