Actually, it has already been proven that the coin has been sold for substantially less to a forum member.
And would that mistaken sale help establish the FMV?
The thing is, on the facts that have emerged thusfar, SG is at fault.
The measure of damages is the sole issue.
I think he should get the only replacement coin that appears available at this time, not have to wait until PCGS slabs a few dozen more. If they do not want to do this, then buyer should buy it and sue for the difference if he desires. He has a alegal right.
As was pointed out earlier, SG seems to do this all the time. If they want to have it online in auction, on their site, and in the store, then they better get it together or they will have more complaints like this.
One way to get hem motivated to get their act together is to sue them for mistakes and let them pay. Even if they are only awarded a paltry or nominal amount for this case, they will pay for the trial. Or settle.
When it comes to settling, it is up to the parties to decide what is fair, not this forum.
Further, if we are not going to be honest in assessing the damages and the likelihood of thr outcome of the suit, then it would be impossible to negotiate a fair settlement.
Again:
SG loses in court... All day every day.
SG pays the full damages (what buyer got v. what he should have gotten)
At this point, the only replacement coin on the market is selling for over $500.
How long must buyer wait while they "look" for one?
The population can change any second, or demand could increase dramatically in these days of Jefferson on the nickel. Volitile and thinly capitalized. Not stable. Under that condition, I think buyer should buy the coin and bill them. They don't pay: he brings suit in Michigan, since they are doing biz in Michigan. They seem to have made an effort to market their products there.
I see that lawyer warned them. Once he files suit, he will make them spend 100 x the money they would lose on doing the right thing.
They could save themselves the cost of defending the suit. Why should he give anything else?
Bottm line: Buyer would seem willing to accept the coin now.
Once he files suit, I think he will push for court costs, and they will HAVE to answer the suit, or hope for a collateral attack, at their peril.
<< Good faith is finding a coin NOW, not next week or next month. >>
"NOW" is not a realistic, necessary or reasonable time period. There is no fear of irreparable harm to the possible replacements out there, or to the buyer.
Relax.
IF PCGS slabs a few more, maybe the price will go down, but buyer would be done out of his bargain: the coin now, when it is hard to get.
OTOH, if PCGS does not slab any more and demand rises even slightly (maybe that already happened) then the coin could be even harder to find.
Tell me, exactly how long is reasonable?
Reasonable changes with the circumstances. What if Jeff commems start doing a 1999 silver proof set, never to come back down? Or 1995 W Proof ASE? At some point, it WOULD be unconscionable to enforce this.
I think buyer had a right to at least know when they would have his coin. You cannot leave it open. And if he has a right to it, then now is a fine time to get it. The law would think this is already a thing done, when they said they shipped the coin.
Without a deadline for performance (which is overdue anyway)their "good faith offer" is illusory.
A good faith offer is not an illusion. Their (SG's) settlement offer is no "good faith" offer.
I note that they have not come to their own aid here. At least the buyer (who is apparantly a lawyer and knows his statements are admissions) told his story. SG has no comment?
I note that they have not come to their own aid here. At least the buyer (who is apparantly a lawyer and knows his statements are admissions) told his story. SG has no comment?
Hard to imagine that SG does not monitor these boards at all times. After all, this is the center of the universe, isn't it?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
back from the beach. So SG took a lost on the coin, posters are saying. The question should be why is SG selling the same coin at different venues? Doesn’t E-Bay have a policy against this?
Also all SG cared about was the bottom line. As all companies should have a budget line CODB (cost of doing business) it seems SG didn’t want to dip in to it.
To my knowledge I've never made the same mistake dozens of times.
The law won't forgive your first one if it is this mistake. Why should it? The law is pretty clear here. The person that makes the mistake generally has to pay for it instead of the party that didn't make the mistake.
Making the mistake numerous times only helps buyer's case.
And to the best of my knowledge, you also haven't done tens of thousands of problem-free transactions.
Gee, you prolly have driven hundreds of thousands of miles. Think that matters if you hit smoeone or smoething and you are negligently at fault? It might be relevent to show you are generally a good driver, if that is at issue.
Smoehow, I do not think that past wonderful transactions are going to matter to a fact finder smoe much as the retaliatory negative they dished out for THEIR mistake. That would really put me off as judge or jury. Of course, legally, SG ain't got a leg to stand on anyway. The unconscionabilty issue is an old dog that won't hunt. The settlement offer refusal is a dog with fleass that can't be killed unless and until they offer a closed end settlement.
All this nonsense about how he asked for (demanded) performance is a pickled red herring.
Buyer is not obligated to settle. Especially he is not obligated to settle for what SG or anyone else wants.
Further, his analysis of the case is correct. Thus far, only one has even attempted to assail his position by arguing against slam-dunk status. That contention is easily debunked and SG loses, maybe on a motion for summary judgment. Then all that will be left is damages. One must allege damages unless seeking a nominal damages that establish a right or some other purpose.
SG loses.
Is there a Bet/Handicap/wager forum here like the B/S/T forum?
Anyway, the sooner SG realizes the true nature of the probem the sooner they make the right moves to settle.
Of course, it is barely possible that the buyer got it out of his system by spouting off here. If so, SG is VERY lucky. He could rip them a new one. (And he knows it)
Smoe people do not take kindly to people that tell them: "We shipped that today" and then try to ship it today... When they said they already did.
While that isn't smoething to sue over, the K breech is. And when you PO people they smoetimes do not care what it takes to try to enforce a right, be it real or perceived... Especially if it costs the person/people/firm that POed them.
<< <i>Accordingly, section 11713.1(e) does not undermine our determination that, under the circumstances, enforcement of the contract for the sale of the 1995 Jaguar XJ6 Vanden Plas at the $25,995 mistaken price would be unconscionable.
Do you seriously think that any court is going to say that this is unenforceable due to unconscionability? >>
Stiffy - thh Court used PERCENTAGES in its opinion - as low as 6% to as high as 32% to find a unconscionable result - someone who demands a replacement coin at MORE than 200% is probably going to get the same result as in the case cited. The likelihood of winning on unconscionablity is very high if you understand the Court's analysis.
<< <i> I gotta say, fault and breech of contract do not seem to be in doubt. Damages are the only issue, IMHO. >>
Not a "Slam Dunk" for sure and the real damages would be equally egregious to both as Beepy, a Wisconsin attorney, would not have fun (and would be much poorer for his efforts) to take this $150 case to court and incur substantial cost, not to mention the aggravation and stress of the resulting litigation - There's probably a greater chance that he would lose than win - but even if he WON he might find that his monetary damages were the difference between his bid of $150 and the FMV which may be no more than $90 (High sale: $240 - $150 = $90).
As someone earlier pointed out, there have been
<< <i>9 separate auction records alone this year in 2005 with a hammer price of a low of $140 and a high of $240 >>
There's also another sale for $52.50 (which per this message board is the actual coin that Beepy bid on). So, based on the facts, discounting the $52.50 sale, the average FMV of these coins is around $200, and even IF Beeby were to WIN, he might be awarded less than $50 for his efforts. Certainly not a situation that someone ought to get exercised about. As his "demand" of $350 is 7 tiimes what he might obtain if he litigated and was able to reverse that Califonia decision (or factually distinguish it), a Demand that is 7 times greater than actualy damages is NOT reasonable.
But - I've come to the sad conclusion that Beepy's real motive may have been to disparage Superior as they were unwilling to afford him a "windfall" for what appears to be their honest mistake. Since when did collecting modern coins become a "gotcha game"?
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain Newmismatist
Not a "Slam Dunk" for sure and the real damages would be equally egregious to both as Beepy, a Wisconsin attorney, would not have fun (and would be much poorer for his efforts) to take this $150 case to court and incur substantial cost, not to mention the aggravation and stress of the resulting litigation - There's probably a greater chance that he would lose than win - but even if he WON he might find that his monetary damages were the difference between his bid of $150 and the FMV which may be no more than $90.
And WHEN will they measure FMV? Oh wait, at the time of the breech... Plus interest. That might change if they string him along. You have to do equity to get equity and all.
In his home state and at local court, which he is likely at often enough, I doubt there will be much stress. Do you see a counterclaim? No? Then, SG pays a lawyer with no hope of any return, win or lose. Buyer gets his rights vindicated and a few bucks. SG gets nothing and pays a lawyer.
How much is "worth it" for them to duck the deal?
Also, I know that past sales make a nice estimate, but in volitile stuff like coins and bullion, well, time is money. Values change faster than, well faster than the daily price guide can keep up with. Estimates arew not as reliable as actual sales.
You want to wait? What happens when the price goes up? A judge is likely to not find unconscionabilty (an equitable remedy) where SG has sat on its hands and refused to buy an available replacement.
As far as anyone scaring buyer with the thought of litigation, I doubt that. Seems to me that you want to negotiate a deal for SG. Going Pro Bono on that? I guess SG would remember the favor, but I doubt that buyer will bite. He seems to know exactly where he stands.
I see where he stands too. I would much rather be in his shoes than SG. If I were mediating this, I would just tell Sg to offer $250 and be done with it. I think $350 would be a better bargain in terms of restoring faith and showing good faith, but it is their money.
Since SG wants to quibble, buyer says he wants to have a day in court to get a fair deal, not a "take this and be happy" settlement for less than what he, in his expert opinion as a lawyer, believes it is worth.
I think he has that right. It is going to cost, but most of his actual costs (Filing fees, service etc.) will be awarded to him from SG, IMHO.
I had this happen to me by another auction house, lost $1500 profit on a $500 item and just let it go. In my opinion Beepy is just being silly, but at the same time there does seem to be a lot of sloppy mistakes lately by all Auctions, because they are taking in too many consignments for their manpower levels. Frankly I don't see why Superior is selling modern junk of little value on Ebay in the first place, at least under their corporate name.
<< <i>And to the best of my knowledge, you also haven't done tens of thousands of problem-free transactions. >>
My dad had back surgery about six months ago, and during the procedure, the doctor nicked his spinal cord, causing it to leak CSF. He also developed a staph infection that nearly killed him. The doctor told my dad that he (the doctor) is successful without complications 199 out of 200 times. My dad nearly died because he happened to be the unlucky one in 200.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
What "windfall" was Beepy expecting? The coin that he actually bought and paid for? God forbid he get that because that would make no sense I guess.
Why do you even refer to it as a "windfall" in the same post in which you state that FMV is only about $50 higher that his bid? >>
The windfall is this: (Quoted directly from Brett C. Petranech, Attorney at Law Madison ie Beepy's email to Superior):
"-----Original Message----- From: beepy390 Beepy390 [mailto:beepy390@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 12:04 PM To: Susan Fama (x228) Cc: Paul Song (x224); Louis Palafoutas (x251) Subject: RE: Superior Galleries
Ms. Fama:
A replacement coin remains available for purchase from the eBay seller known as "acar*." This seller informed me yesterday that the reserve price for the coin is $500. Subtracting my purchase price of $153.29 from that amount means that Superior Galleries can fulfill its contract with me for $346.71, not including S/H/I. We have now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter.
As for your feelings, imagine the OUTRAGE I felt . . . "
Now a couple of things are apparant from this exchange: One is that Brett has researched the Ebay and found some one offering the coin at a reserve of $500 and he therefore states that HE has "now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter."
While that may be a good position to advocate as a lawyer, it unfortunatley does not establish the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the coin in question. All it means is that an ebay seller is asking $500 for that coin and that abmount, less $153.29 is what Superior MUST pay to protect its reputation. That looks like an attempt to negotiate the AMOUNT of damages that Beepy feels that he has sustained. I'm not sure any Judge would concur in that position, as FMV is determined by what a willing buyer would pay a willing selling in an arms-length transaction. The auction sales referenced are undoubtedly a better measure of FMV than what appears to be an unreasonable high asking price for a coin that hs a history of sales. If the ACTUAL sales average between $140 and $250, an average sale price would be the price realized for each coin divivde by the total sales. I'm guesstimating it would be arround $200 - could be more if all the sales save 1 are in the $240 range, or even lower if most sales were under $200. That's a mathematical computation.
THe second theing established is that Beepy has a low threshhold for OUTRAGE and that "outrage" can be resolved by the payment to him by Superior of "$346.71, not including S/H/I" - which leads me to conclude that Beppy is looking for a windfall, with the implied threat that if his demand is not met, he will seek to damage Superior's reputation. This post here leads me to a reasonable conclusion that an underlying motive may have been to extract $346.71 from Superior with the implied threat that if they didn't pay him far more than difference between the FMV of that coin and his winning bid, he would seek to publically disparage Superior's reputation. When they didn't pay, he did just that - Note his title to his thread: "Buyer beware when dealing w/ Superior Galleries!"
Now, I could be wrong, and perhaps Beepy has sustained significant emotional distress over this "mistake", but if that's the case, I would be quite surprised - It also seems that there are a few here who have a similar agenda, which somewhat surprises me. On the other hand, I'm not shocked, as I found that were money is involved, people sometimes lose sight of reason and common sense. In this case, I'm surprised that it's over such a trival amount and regarding a modern coin whose value is more depandant on a number on the paper insert, than it's rarity or desirablility.
"A replacement coin remains available for purchase from the eBay seller known as "acar*." This seller informed me yesterday that the reserve price for the coin is $500. Subtracting my purchase price of $153.29 from that amount means that Superior Galleries can fulfill its contract with me for $346.71, not including S/H/I. We have now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter."
Now - analyse this
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain Newmismatist
One day, there was this lawyer who had just bought a new car, and he was eager to show it off to his colleagues, when all of a sudden an eighteen wheeler came out of nowhere and took of the driver's side door with him standing right there. "NOOO!" he screamed, because he knew that no matter how good a mechanic tried to fix it, it never would be the same. Finally, a cop came by, and the lawyer ran up to him yelling. "MY JAGUAR DOOR WAS JUST RUINED BY SOME FOOLISH DRIVER!!!" he exclaimed. "Your a lawyer aren't you?" asked the policeman. "Yes, I am, but what does this have to do with my car?!?!" the lawyer asked. "HA! Your lawyers are always so materialistic. All you care about is your possessions. I bet you didn't even notice that your left arm is missing did you?" the cop said. The lawyer looked down at his side and exclaimed "MY ROLEX!"
I don't think that is an on point/fair analogy. It would have been such had you said that you bid on the wrong coin, the wrong amount through key-punch error, etc. You are speaking of a change of heart, not an honest, albeit sloppy mistake.
The difficulty of proving mistake v buyer's remorse militates toward a finding that the person making the unilateral mistake bears the consequences. Period.
Mark, maybe you missed the part of law school where you looked at converse rulings and saw what might happen. Like the future with ebay saying "you should honor your bids, but no contract exists."
Because no contract will survive a buyer's remorse unless the buyer is foolish enough to say so. No more non-paying bidders because they can cancel at will. All you have to say is you made a mistake.
Like the guy who got sued for that bid recently. He is claiming his child bid/honest buy sloppy mistake in essence. I don't know the latest on that case, but I haven't heard of a dismissal, have you?
Plaintiff would have a duty to mitigate by reselling and trying to recoup the difference from defendant.
If buyer here buys the cheapest replacement available, I don't see hpow buyer can mitigate any more than that.
You and others say to wait. How long should he wait? No "about" this long. Exactly how long?
As far as I can see, his cause of action is ripe and thre statute of limitations is running. In Ks that can be a year after accrual, IIRC.
How long is he "required" to wait for him to be acting in "good faith" when he buys a replacement?
It seems everyone agrees he has a right to the benefit of his bargain.
<< <i>My dad had back surgery about six months ago, and during the procedure, the doctor nicked his spinal cord, causing it to leak CSF. He also developed a staph infection that nearly killed him. The doctor told my dad that he (the doctor) is successful without complications 199 out of 200 times. My dad nearly died because he happened to be the unlucky one in 200. >>
An event of that magnitude and danger is not even a relevant comparison to a mistake made with a piddly $150 coin sale.
Stiiffy - you sound like a lawyer looking to sue someone - If so, I would hope you pick a better case than this - What you are really arguing is that Beepy, should he choose to litigate could cost Superior a lot of money, and that's no doubt true, BUT that is not a good reason to litigate. It's litigation based on spite, anger and a draconian view of the law and the remedies afforded - I'd suggest you read Shakespear's Merchent of Venice before you recommend litigation designed to extract a pound of flesh - but, Hey, if that what makes your day, go for it. That's why we have a legal system in this country.
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain Newmismatist
<< <i>An event of that magnitude and danger is not even a relevant comparison to a mistake made with a piddly $150 coin sale. >>
Oh I agree with that. I just don't think that "we've done thousands of transactions" is an excuse for "we've made dozens of mistakes." The doctor certainly was not justified in believing he did no wrong just because he had done hundreds of other successful procedures.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
Brett - Welcome to the boards! The best advice I can give is that you should loosen up. Superior made an honest mistake. Just let it go. This is a friggin' hobby, not a blood sport. (Of course Russ may disagree.) That said, there's one more thing that you should consider. Superior sold you a coin that they thought they still owned, but they had apparently already sold it to someone else. Now, if this was a K-Rand, I'd say they would be obligated to deliver another K-Rand. But collectible coins, even slabbed moderns, are not commodities. I repeat, coins are not commodities. You are not obligated to accept a similar coin and they are not obligated to deliver a comparable coin.
When you become the OP's banker, lawyer or finacial advisor, I'll concede that it is possibly your business how and where he spends his money or releases claims.
So, Andy, why don't you reach deep into YOUR pocket and pay the OP tree-fiddy. ($350) And get SG to appologize.Or hey, go out and buy a PCGS 70 widget... With your money, because SG doesn't seem to wannabe paying the market value as seen from:
What is available and which is cheapest.
Seems to me a lot of peeps are talkin' FMV. But no one can find a coin for FMV at this time. Funny, huh?
Stiiffy - you sound like a lawyer looking to sue someone - If so, I would hope you pick a better case than this - What you are really arguing is that Beepy, should he choose to litigate could cost Superior a lot of money, and that's no doubt true, BUT that is not a good reason to litigate. It's litigation based on spite, anger and a draconian view of the law and the remedies afforded - I'd suggest you read Shakespear's Merchent of Venice before you recommend litigation designed to extract a pound of flesh - but, Hey, if that what makes your day, go for it. That's why we have a legal system in this country.
1. Not looking to sue anyone. Putting out the truth, whether you like it or not. What is your deal in this? 2. I have no dog in this hunt. I don't know any parties personally. Haven't done biz with either. How about you? 3. This is a winnable case for the OP. OP KNOWS it. SG probably knows it too. Wonder if they have been sued for this before? What is the problem with people NOT getting: It goes to court-SG loses on liability. Damages are the sole question, and will not be figured out in this forum. 4. Do I think that other ideas are better than court? Absolutely. Arbitration is what I think might be best. Maybe with ANA, maybe not. If OP files suit, we can see what happens. 5. Who recommended litigation? The OP said he is filing suit. I am pointing out (correctly) that SG is not in for a good time in court here. 6. Of course Beepy can cost SG money. Only because his case has merit. Without merit, they would have a slapp suit only to worry about. If the facts are as laid out. SG is the one to worry. 7. The remedies are what they are. SG should probably deal with the realities of law and settle for what beepy wants. 8. Cut the nonsense about Merchant of Venice. Three Lbs. of flesh would have killed him. For your MOV anaogy to have anything to commend it, you would have to contend that $350 would put SG out of business. 9. Why don't you (and others) go read the UCC. A judge will defer to the UCC, likely not to the Bard of S-O-A.
I just don't think that "we've done thousands of transactions" is an excuse for "we've made dozens of mistakes."
Of course that's right. But your original comment made it sound like you thought you were somehow superior to Superior because you have never made made the same mistake a dozen (or dozens?) of times. That's not a fair comparison because you do not operate on their scale. Nor, for that matter, is it in the least bit relevant how wonderful you are. We're not debating your business practices.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
"What "windfall" was Beepy expecting? The coin that he actually bought and paid for? God forbid he get that because that would make no sense I guess."
What problem smoe others have with SG taking responsibility is, I dunno.
"Why do you even refer to it as a "windfall" in the same post in which you state that FMV is only about $50 higher that his bid?"
Coins can be worth $50 more overnight. Since they told Beeper that the coin was in the mail and stalled him, FMV could have changed a whole bunch in the interim. 'Windfall' assumes that beeper didn't have the benefit of his bargain coming to him. As you said, God forbid he should get what he bid on.
Further, how dare him sue when they refuse? Four other people have the exact same problem in this tiny forum. How many more do not lurk here?
Sooner or later, smoeone is going to sue. Maybe it is better if it is this (relatively) cheap case? If it were a harder coin to get (this coin seems tough, none on ebay now or in the past 2 weeks) where SG might have to pony up several thousand, it would be worse.
If a hundred people show up and have the same problem, maybe class action status would be apropos. 40 or so would probably be enough to get class action status in Fed court.
I think nipping it in the bud is the way to go: Pay the guy a reasonable settlement for a coin you cannot find at FMV and fix the system.
A Russian, a Cuban, an American and a Lawyer are in a train. The Russian takes a bottle of the Best Vodka out of his pack; pours some into a glass, drinks it, and says: "In Russia, we have the best vodka of the world, nowhere in the world you can find Vodka as good as the one we produce in Russia. And we have so much of it, that we can just throw it away..." Saying that, he open the window and throw the rest of the bottle through it. All the others are quite impressed. The Cuban takes a pack of Havanas, takes one of them, lights it and begins to smoke it saying: In Cuba, we have the best cigars of the world: Havanas. Nowhere in the world there is so many and so good cigar and we have so much of them, that we can just throw them away...". Saying that, he throws the pack of Havanas through the window. One more time, everybody is quite impressed. At this time, the American just stands up, opens the window, and throws the Lawyer through it...
Of course that's right. But your original comment made it sound like you thought you were somehow superior to Superior because you have never made made the same mistake a dozen (or dozens?) of times. That's not a fair comparison because you do not operate on their scale. Nor, for that matter, is it in the least bit relevant how wonderful you are. We're not debating your business practices.
>>
Andy, my comment was a reply to Julian's post, where he said (paraphrasing) "the only ones who have a right to comment are people who have never made a mistake." I was making the point that, while everyone makes mistakes, most people don't make the same mistake dozens of times.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
Andy, my comment was a reply to Julian's post, where he said (paraphrasing) "the only ones who have a right to comment are people who have never made a mistake." I was making the point that, while everyone makes mistakes, most people don't make the same mistake dozens of times.
Oh. OK.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
The Beepy saga.. A tale of coins, deception and the law.
A harvard business case study in Customer Satisfaction
A way for a lot of us to vent on something other than the chores around the house I am now ignoring.
Conspiracy against Beepy. A brillianbt waste of time...
SERIOUSLY - Whats the longest thread these boards have seen? You'd think somebody had died in this deal by the amount of stuff printed..I did like whover posted the Kramer V. Coin and copied/pasted 4 pages of legal cr@! which after reading through it made me dislike Lawayers even more.
Go get em Beepy, your legal battle should make them fall faster than Enron...
This is officially my last addition top this thread, for I am now full of it! In more ways then one.
"33. Neither Superior nor any affiliated or related company shall be responsible for incidental or consequential damages arising out of any failure of the Terms and Conditions of Sale, the auction or the conduct thereof and in no event shall liability for any such failure exceed the purchase price, premium, or fees paid."
I don't believe anything they say can trump eBay's rules regarding not delivering items bought & paid for.
Let's see if I got this straight:
1. Superior screwed up selling what they didn't have (I've done it a time or 2 and have always done whatever it took to make it right. Whether double the money back or finding a similar item or whatever. No one has ever been really upset though in any case.)
2. They gave the buyer (at best) incorrect info regarding the payment and shipment status of the item.
3. They had a chance to obtain a similar item but made a conscious (business) decision not to.
4. After buyer left feedback, Superior retaliated even thought they knew they were 100% wrong all along.
I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation.
<< <i>I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation. >>
An excellent, concise assessment.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
<< <i>I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation. >>
Agreed completely. The retaliation feedback was unnecessary and reflects even more poorly on them, IMO, than the way they've handled (and sometimes mishandled) this situation.
Personally, if I were them I think a few hundred bucks is a small price to pay to end this situation and keep reputation and integrity intact. But I'm not them, and I do think the OP was a little too pushy, belligerent and impatient in his demand for resolution.
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88.
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88. >>
Lloyd, I'm just up the road from you (40 miles or so North) and if you send him a package, I'll throw in a brand spanking new Jefferson Dollar still in the original mint packaging, untouched by human hands (except those mint employees who I'm told were supposed to wear white cotton gloves) and then he'll have a nice representative example of that coin he missed out on
Lloyd BTW what did your daughter think of you giving away her piggy bank? (If she needs a lawyer let me know - I know a few good ones in your area )
Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain Newmismatist
Sometimes coin dealers and their companies make mistakes, it happens to all of us.
Superior offered you a refund and an apology, so take it. According to their auction terms and conditions, I don't think you have any other recourse other than a refund.
If you feel that badly about them, take them to PNG arbitration or visit their offices personally and talk to them there instead of complaining to all of us about it.
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>According to their auction terms and conditions >>
All else aside, I wonder what a court would think: Superior has "terms and conditions" that absolve them, and eBay has verbiage which states that each sale is a binding contract. I wonder if a court would uphold eBay's "binding contract" or Superior's "terms and conditions?"
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
Superior Galleries is a large company, and they're usually busy, and it's Sunday. I think they have better things to do than stroke a hothead over a lousy $160 or so.
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88. >>
You better watch it Lloyd. He claims to be an "attorney at law"!
I did not post this thread w/ the intention of cutting and running. I posted it on Fri. night, and have been out of town until late this afternoon. Imaging my surprise to have returned to a 16-page thread, which I haven't even finished reading yet.
WOW!!! I seem to have struck a nerve, huh?
I'll respond to a couple of the common themes, to clarify a few things.
1) My auto signature line on this particular email account is my business signature, i.e., the one containing "Attorney at Law." I do find it interesting that including this information in an email is deemed inherently threatening by some, and preening by others. Is there another profession out there which the practitioners of should be ashamed of revealing, or at least should notify the public about only with reservation? I can't recall ever telling someone what I do for a living and the response being, "Don't you bully me!" Oh well.
2) Read my third post - the one to Newmismatist. From my perspective, this deal was a mistake followed by ineptitude, covered with a lie (actually a whole slew of 'em), and finished with a "we have other priorities." I'm still waiting for my first hint of honest-to-goodness customer service (instead of honey-coated brush offs) from this seller.
3) I'm not P.O.'d about not getting a "rip." In fact, I often set the prices I'm willing to pay for coins without any relation to the FMV of the coin. In several recent purchases, I think it fair to say I've even set the FMV for certain coins. I'm not ignorant of FMV, I just tend to buy what I want for what I think is fair for the coin. In this case, I bought (or at least thought I bought) low. In other cases, I buy high.
4) If I'm deemed forceful, boorish, overbearing, loudmouthed, full of myself, or otherwise off-putting by some, I'd ask those of you who classify me in this manner to put yourself in my shoes. I'm told why my coin is late, and that it is on the way. A few hours later, I get an email notifying me that there never was a coin in the first place. I don't know how you folks take being lied to, but I CAN'T STAND IT. Couple a lie with a brush-off, and I become oppositional right quick. Others may not, and I still respect their viewpoints.
5) "Beepy" = B.P., my initials.
6) The PR70 coin that sold for appx $53 was not the coin I bid on and won. My coin (so to speak) was a business strike.
Comments
<< <i>OK Mr. Russ Limbaugh. You are right. >>
What grade are you in?
Russ, NCNE
Russ, NCNE
Actually, it has already been proven that the coin has been sold for substantially less to a forum member.
And would that mistaken sale help establish the FMV?
The thing is, on the facts that have emerged thusfar, SG is at fault.
The measure of damages is the sole issue.
I think he should get the only replacement coin that appears available at this time, not have to wait until PCGS slabs a few dozen more. If they do not want to do this, then buyer should buy it and sue for the difference if he desires. He has a alegal right.
As was pointed out earlier, SG seems to do this all the time. If they want to have it online in auction, on their site, and in the store, then they better get it together or they will have more complaints like this.
One way to get hem motivated to get their act together is to sue them for mistakes and let them pay. Even if they are only awarded a paltry or nominal amount for this case, they will pay for the trial. Or settle.
When it comes to settling, it is up to the parties to decide what is fair, not this forum.
Further, if we are not going to be honest in assessing the damages and the likelihood of thr outcome of the suit, then it would be impossible to negotiate a fair settlement.
Again:
SG loses in court... All day every day.
SG pays the full damages (what buyer got v. what he should have gotten)
At this point, the only replacement coin on the market is selling for over $500.
How long must buyer wait while they "look" for one?
The population can change any second, or demand could increase dramatically in these days of Jefferson on the nickel. Volitile and thinly capitalized. Not stable. Under that condition, I think buyer should buy the coin and bill them. They don't pay: he brings suit in Michigan, since they are doing biz in Michigan. They seem to have made an effort to market their products there.
I see that lawyer warned them. Once he files suit, he will make them spend 100 x the money they would lose on doing the right thing.
They could save themselves the cost of defending the suit. Why should he give anything else?
Bottm line:
Buyer would seem willing to accept the coin now.
Once he files suit, I think he will push for court costs, and they will HAVE to answer the suit, or hope for a collateral attack, at their peril.
It will cost 2-3 grand for an answer, IMHO.
So what is the smart move for SG?
Pay the guy $350 or buy the other coin.
He was here 3 times more than SG.
And to the best of my knowledge, you also haven't done tens of thousands of problem-free transactions.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
"NOW" is not a realistic, necessary or reasonable time period. There is no fear of irreparable harm to the possible replacements out there, or to the buyer.
Relax.
IF PCGS slabs a few more, maybe the price will go down, but buyer would be done out of his bargain: the coin now, when it is hard to get.
OTOH, if PCGS does not slab any more and demand rises even slightly (maybe that already happened) then the coin could be even harder to find.
Tell me, exactly how long is reasonable?
Reasonable changes with the circumstances. What if Jeff commems start doing a 1999 silver proof set, never to come back down? Or 1995 W Proof ASE? At some point, it WOULD be unconscionable to enforce this.
I think buyer had a right to at least know when they would have his coin. You cannot leave it open. And if he has a right to it, then now is a fine time to get it. The law would think this is already a thing done, when they said they shipped the coin.
Without a deadline for performance (which is overdue anyway)their "good faith offer" is illusory.
A good faith offer is not an illusion. Their (SG's) settlement offer is no "good faith" offer.
I note that they have not come to their own aid here. At least the buyer (who is apparantly a lawyer and knows his statements are admissions) told his story. SG has no comment?
Silence smoetimes speaks volumes.
Hard to imagine that SG does not monitor these boards at all times. After all, this is the center of the universe, isn't it?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
back from the beach.
So SG took a lost on the coin, posters are saying. The question should be why is SG selling the same coin at different venues? Doesn’t E-Bay have a policy against this?
Also all SG cared about was the bottom line. As all companies should have a budget line CODB (cost of doing business) it seems SG didn’t want to dip in to it.
The law won't forgive your first one if it is this mistake. Why should it? The law is pretty clear here. The person that makes the mistake generally has to pay for it instead of the party that didn't make the mistake.
Making the mistake numerous times only helps buyer's case.
And to the best of my knowledge, you also haven't done tens of thousands of problem-free transactions.
Gee, you prolly have driven hundreds of thousands of miles. Think that matters if you hit smoeone or smoething and you are negligently at fault? It might be relevent to show you are generally a good driver, if that is at issue.
Smoehow, I do not think that past wonderful transactions are going to matter to a fact finder smoe much as the retaliatory negative they dished out for THEIR mistake. That would really put me off as judge or jury. Of course, legally, SG ain't got a leg to stand on anyway. The unconscionabilty issue is an old dog that won't hunt. The settlement offer refusal is a dog with fleass that can't be killed unless and until they offer a closed end settlement.
All this nonsense about how he asked for (demanded) performance is a pickled red herring.
Buyer is not obligated to settle. Especially he is not obligated to settle for what SG or anyone else wants.
Further, his analysis of the case is correct. Thus far, only one has even attempted to assail his position by arguing against slam-dunk status. That contention is easily debunked and SG loses, maybe on a motion for summary judgment. Then all that will be left is damages.
One must allege damages unless seeking a nominal damages that establish a right or some other purpose.
SG loses.
Is there a Bet/Handicap/wager forum here like the B/S/T forum?
Anyway, the sooner SG realizes the true nature of the probem the sooner they make the right moves to settle.
Of course, it is barely possible that the buyer got it out of his system by spouting off here. If so, SG is VERY lucky. He could rip them a new one. (And he knows it)
Smoe people do not take kindly to people that tell them: "We shipped that today" and then try to ship it today... When they said they already did.
While that isn't smoething to sue over, the K breech is. And when you PO people they smoetimes do not care what it takes to try to enforce a right, be it real or perceived... Especially if it costs the person/people/firm that POed them.
Ask ac g.
<< <i>Accordingly, section 11713.1(e) does not undermine our determination that, under the circumstances, enforcement of the contract for the sale of the 1995 Jaguar XJ6 Vanden Plas at the $25,995 mistaken price would be unconscionable.
Do you seriously think that any court is going to say that this is unenforceable due to unconscionability? >>
Stiffy - thh Court used PERCENTAGES in its opinion - as low as 6% to as high as 32% to find a unconscionable result - someone who demands a replacement coin at MORE than 200% is probably going to get the same result as in the case cited. The likelihood of winning on unconscionablity is very high if you understand the Court's analysis.
<< <i> I gotta say, fault and breech of contract do not seem to be in doubt. Damages are the only issue, IMHO. >>
Not a "Slam Dunk" for sure and the real damages would be equally egregious to both as Beepy, a Wisconsin attorney, would not have fun (and would be much poorer for his efforts) to take this $150 case to court and incur substantial cost, not to mention the aggravation and stress of the resulting litigation - There's probably a greater chance that he would lose than win - but even if he WON he might find that his monetary damages were the difference between his bid of $150 and the FMV which may be no more than $90 (High sale: $240 - $150 = $90).
As someone earlier pointed out, there have been
<< <i>9 separate auction records alone this year in 2005 with a hammer price of a low of $140 and a high of $240 >>
There's also another sale for $52.50 (which per this message board is the actual coin that Beepy bid on). So, based on the facts, discounting the $52.50 sale, the average FMV of these coins is around $200, and even IF Beeby were to WIN, he might be awarded less than $50 for his efforts. Certainly not a situation that someone ought to get exercised about. As his "demand" of $350 is 7 tiimes what he might obtain if he litigated and was able to reverse that Califonia decision (or factually distinguish it), a Demand that is 7 times greater than actualy damages is NOT reasonable.
But - I've come to the sad conclusion that Beepy's real motive may have been to disparage Superior as they were unwilling to afford him a "windfall" for what appears to be their honest mistake. Since when did collecting modern coins become a "gotcha game"?
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
And WHEN will they measure FMV? Oh wait, at the time of the breech... Plus interest. That might change if they string him along. You have to do equity to get equity and all.
In his home state and at local court, which he is likely at often enough, I doubt there will be much stress. Do you see a counterclaim? No? Then, SG pays a lawyer with no hope of any return, win or lose. Buyer gets his rights vindicated and a few bucks. SG gets nothing and pays a lawyer.
How much is "worth it" for them to duck the deal?
Also, I know that past sales make a nice estimate, but in volitile stuff like coins and bullion, well, time is money. Values change faster than, well faster than the daily price guide can keep up with. Estimates arew not as reliable as actual sales.
You want to wait? What happens when the price goes up? A judge is likely to not find unconscionabilty (an equitable remedy) where SG has sat on its hands and refused to buy an available replacement.
As far as anyone scaring buyer with the thought of litigation, I doubt that. Seems to me that you want to negotiate a deal for SG. Going Pro Bono on that? I guess SG would remember the favor, but I doubt that buyer will bite. He seems to know exactly where he stands.
I see where he stands too. I would much rather be in his shoes than SG.
If I were mediating this, I would just tell Sg to offer $250 and be done with it. I think $350 would be a better bargain in terms of restoring faith and showing good faith, but it is their money.
Since SG wants to quibble, buyer says he wants to have a day in court to get a fair deal, not a "take this and be happy" settlement for less than what he, in his expert opinion as a lawyer, believes it is worth.
I think he has that right. It is going to cost, but most of his actual costs (Filing fees, service etc.) will be awarded to him from SG, IMHO.
<< <i>And to the best of my knowledge, you also haven't done tens of thousands of problem-free transactions. >>
My dad had back surgery about six months ago, and during the procedure, the doctor nicked his spinal cord, causing it to leak CSF. He also developed a staph infection that nearly killed him. The doctor told my dad that he (the doctor) is successful without complications 199 out of 200 times. My dad nearly died because he happened to be the unlucky one in 200.
<< <i>Newmismatist,
What "windfall" was Beepy expecting? The coin that he actually bought and paid for? God forbid he get that because that would make no sense I guess.
Why do you even refer to it as a "windfall" in the same post in which you state that FMV is only about $50 higher that his bid? >>
The windfall is this: (Quoted directly from Brett C. Petranech, Attorney at Law Madison ie Beepy's email to Superior):
"-----Original Message-----
From: beepy390 Beepy390 [mailto:beepy390@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 12:04 PM
To: Susan Fama (x228)
Cc: Paul Song (x224); Louis Palafoutas (x251)
Subject: RE: Superior Galleries
Ms. Fama:
A replacement coin remains available for purchase from the eBay seller known as "acar*." This seller informed me yesterday that the reserve price for the coin is $500. Subtracting my purchase price of $153.29 from that amount means that Superior Galleries can fulfill its contract with me for $346.71, not including S/H/I. We have now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter.
As for your feelings, imagine the OUTRAGE I felt . . . "
Now a couple of things are apparant from this exchange: One is that Brett has researched the Ebay and found some one offering the coin at a reserve of $500 and he therefore states that HE has "now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter."
While that may be a good position to advocate as a lawyer, it unfortunatley does not establish the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the coin in question. All it means is that an ebay seller is asking $500 for that coin and that abmount, less $153.29 is what Superior MUST pay to protect its reputation. That looks like an attempt to negotiate the AMOUNT of damages that Beepy feels that he has sustained. I'm not sure any Judge would concur in that position, as FMV is determined by what a willing buyer would pay a willing selling in an arms-length transaction. The auction sales referenced are undoubtedly a better measure of FMV than what appears to be an unreasonable high asking price for a coin that hs a history of sales. If the ACTUAL sales average between $140 and $250, an average sale price would be the price realized for each coin divivde by the total sales. I'm guesstimating it would be arround $200 - could be more if all the sales save 1 are in the $240 range, or even lower if most sales were under $200. That's a mathematical computation.
THe second theing established is that Beepy has a low threshhold for OUTRAGE and that "outrage" can be resolved by the payment to him by Superior of "$346.71, not including S/H/I" - which leads me to conclude that Beppy is looking for a windfall, with the implied threat that if his demand is not met, he will seek to damage Superior's reputation. This post here leads me to a reasonable conclusion that an underlying motive may have been to extract $346.71 from Superior with the implied threat that if they didn't pay him far more than difference between the FMV of that coin and his winning bid, he would seek to publically disparage Superior's reputation. When they didn't pay, he did just that - Note his title to his thread: "Buyer beware when dealing w/ Superior Galleries!"
Now, I could be wrong, and perhaps Beepy has sustained significant emotional distress over this "mistake", but if that's the case, I would be quite surprised - It also seems that there are a few here who have a similar agenda, which somewhat surprises me. On the other hand, I'm not shocked, as I found that were money is involved, people sometimes lose sight of reason and common sense. In this case, I'm surprised that it's over such a trival amount and regarding a modern coin whose value is more depandant on a number on the paper insert, than it's rarity or desirablility.
"A replacement coin remains available for purchase from the eBay seller known as "acar*." This seller informed me yesterday that the reserve price for the coin is $500. Subtracting my purchase price of $153.29 from that amount means that Superior Galleries can fulfill its contract with me for $346.71, not including S/H/I. We have now established the price of Superior Galleries' reputation in this matter."
Now - analyse this
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
The difficulty of proving mistake v buyer's remorse militates toward a finding that the person making the unilateral mistake bears the consequences. Period.
Mark, maybe you missed the part of law school where you looked at converse rulings and saw what might happen. Like the future with ebay saying "you should honor your bids, but no contract exists."
Because no contract will survive a buyer's remorse unless the buyer is foolish enough to say so. No more non-paying bidders because they can cancel at will. All you have to say is you made a mistake.
Like the guy who got sued for that bid recently. He is claiming his child bid/honest buy sloppy mistake in essence. I don't know the latest on that case, but I haven't heard of a dismissal, have you?
Plaintiff would have a duty to mitigate by reselling and trying to recoup the difference from defendant.
If buyer here buys the cheapest replacement available, I don't see hpow buyer can mitigate any more than that.
You and others say to wait. How long should he wait? No "about" this long. Exactly how long?
As far as I can see, his cause of action is ripe and thre statute of limitations is running. In Ks that can be a year after accrual, IIRC.
How long is he "required" to wait for him to be acting in "good faith" when he buys a replacement?
It seems everyone agrees he has a right to the benefit of his bargain.
When?
<< <i>My dad had back surgery about six months ago, and during the procedure, the doctor nicked his spinal cord, causing it to leak CSF. He also developed a staph infection that nearly killed him. The doctor told my dad that he (the doctor) is successful without complications 199 out of 200 times. My dad nearly died because he happened to be the unlucky one in 200. >>
An event of that magnitude and danger is not even a relevant comparison to a mistake made with a piddly $150 coin sale.
Russ, NCNE
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
<< <i>An event of that magnitude and danger is not even a relevant comparison to a mistake made with a piddly $150 coin sale. >>
Oh I agree with that. I just don't think that "we've done thousands of transactions" is an excuse for "we've made dozens of mistakes." The doctor certainly was not justified in believing he did no wrong just because he had done hundreds of other successful procedures.
Brett - Welcome to the boards! The best advice I can give is that you should loosen up. Superior made an honest mistake. Just let it go. This is a friggin' hobby, not a blood sport. (Of course Russ may disagree.) That said, there's one more thing that you should consider. Superior sold you a coin that they thought they still owned, but they had apparently already sold it to someone else. Now, if this was a K-Rand, I'd say they would be obligated to deliver another K-Rand. But collectible coins, even slabbed moderns, are not commodities. I repeat, coins are not commodities. You are not obligated to accept a similar coin and they are not obligated to deliver a comparable coin.
When you become the OP's banker, lawyer or finacial advisor, I'll concede that it is possibly your business how and where he spends his money or releases claims.
So, Andy, why don't you reach deep into YOUR pocket and pay the OP tree-fiddy. ($350) And get SG to appologize.Or hey, go out and buy a PCGS 70 widget... With your money, because SG doesn't seem to wannabe paying the market value as seen from:
What is available and which is cheapest.
Seems to me a lot of peeps are talkin' FMV. But no one can find a coin for FMV at this time. Funny, huh?
How can FMV be x, but no coin at x price exists?
1. Not looking to sue anyone. Putting out the truth, whether you like it or not. What is your deal in this?
2. I have no dog in this hunt. I don't know any parties personally. Haven't done biz with either. How about you?
3. This is a winnable case for the OP. OP KNOWS it. SG probably knows it too. Wonder if they have been sued for this before? What is the problem with people NOT getting:
It goes to court-SG loses on liability. Damages are the sole question, and will not be figured out in this forum.
4. Do I think that other ideas are better than court? Absolutely. Arbitration is what I think might be best. Maybe with ANA, maybe not. If OP files suit, we can see what happens.
5. Who recommended litigation? The OP said he is filing suit. I am pointing out (correctly) that SG is not in for a good time in court here.
6. Of course Beepy can cost SG money. Only because his case has merit. Without merit, they would have a slapp suit only to worry about. If the facts are as laid out. SG is the one to worry.
7. The remedies are what they are. SG should probably deal with the realities of law and settle for what beepy wants.
8. Cut the nonsense about Merchant of Venice. Three Lbs. of flesh would have killed him. For your MOV anaogy to have anything to commend it, you would have to contend that $350 would put SG out of business.
9. Why don't you (and others) go read the UCC. A judge will defer to the UCC, likely not to the Bard of S-O-A.
Of course that's right. But your original comment made it sound like you thought you were somehow superior to Superior because you have never made made the same mistake a dozen (or dozens?) of times. That's not a fair comparison because you do not operate on their scale. Nor, for that matter, is it in the least bit relevant how wonderful you are. We're not debating your business practices.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
This thread originated late Friday night. It's now Sunday afternoon. And still no coins?
You and mercurydimeguy have no patience, do you? Don't worry, the coins will arrive soon enough.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>2. I have no dog in this hunt. >>
Why does that statement invariably come from somebody who repeatedly, pointedly, and aggressively continues to argue their point of view?
Russ, NCNE
What problem smoe others have with SG taking responsibility is, I dunno.
"Why do you even refer to it as a "windfall" in the same post in which you state that FMV is only about $50 higher that his bid?"
Coins can be worth $50 more overnight. Since they told Beeper that the coin was in the mail and stalled him, FMV could have changed a whole bunch in the interim. 'Windfall' assumes that beeper didn't have the benefit of his bargain coming to him. As you said, God forbid he should get what he bid on.
Further, how dare him sue when they refuse?
Four other people have the exact same problem in this tiny forum. How many more do not lurk here?
Sooner or later, smoeone is going to sue. Maybe it is better if it is this (relatively) cheap case? If it were a harder coin to get (this coin seems tough, none on ebay now or in the past 2 weeks) where SG might have to pony up several thousand, it would be worse.
If a hundred people show up and have the same problem, maybe class action status would be apropos. 40 or so would probably be enough to get class action status in Fed court.
I think nipping it in the bud is the way to go:
Pay the guy a reasonable settlement for a coin you cannot find at FMV and fix the system.
Why does that statement invariably come from somebody who repeatedly, pointedly, and aggressively continues to argue their point of view?
Russ, NCNE
Russ never commented on anything he was not directly involved in.
Is that a correct statement?
The Cuban takes a pack of Havanas, takes one of them, lights it and begins to smoke it saying: In Cuba, we have the best cigars of the world: Havanas. Nowhere in the world there is so many and so good cigar and we have so much of them, that we can just throw them away...". Saying that, he throws the pack of Havanas through the window. One more time, everybody is quite impressed.
At this time, the American just stands up, opens the window, and throws the Lawyer through it...
Well then he deserves nothing. He shouldn't even get a refund.
<< <i><< 2. I have no dog in this hunt. >>
Why does that statement invariably come from somebody who repeatedly, pointedly, and aggressively continues to argue their point of view?
Russ, NCNE
Russ never commented on anything he was not directly involved in.
Is that a correct statement? >>
I've never said "I have no dog in this hunt" as I posted argument after argument clearly demonstrating that my dog is hunting.
Russ, NCNE
Of course that's right. But your original comment made it sound like you thought you were somehow superior to Superior because you have never made made the same mistake a dozen (or dozens?) of times. That's not a fair comparison because you do not operate on their scale. Nor, for that matter, is it in the least bit relevant how wonderful you are. We're not debating your business practices.
>>
Andy, my comment was a reply to Julian's post, where he said (paraphrasing) "the only ones who have a right to comment are people who have never made a mistake." I was making the point that, while everyone makes mistakes, most people don't make the same mistake dozens of times.
Oh. OK.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>This thread is too long. Let it die!!! >>
You just TTT'd it!
A harvard business case study in Customer Satisfaction
A way for a lot of us to vent on something other than the chores around the house I am now ignoring.
Conspiracy against Beepy. A brillianbt waste of time...
SERIOUSLY - Whats the longest thread these boards have seen? You'd think somebody had died in this deal by the amount of stuff printed..I did like whover posted the Kramer V. Coin and copied/pasted 4 pages of legal cr@! which after reading through it made me dislike Lawayers even more.
Go get em Beepy, your legal battle should make them fall faster than Enron...
This is officially my last addition top this thread, for I am now full of it! In more ways then one.
Skerke
"33. Neither Superior nor any affiliated or related company shall be responsible for incidental or consequential damages arising out of any failure of the Terms and Conditions of Sale, the auction or the conduct thereof and in no event shall liability for any such failure exceed the purchase price, premium, or fees paid."
I don't believe anything they say can trump eBay's rules regarding not delivering items bought & paid for.
Let's see if I got this straight:
1. Superior screwed up selling what they didn't have (I've done it a time or 2 and have always done whatever it took to make it right. Whether double the money back or finding a similar item or whatever. No one has ever been really upset though in any case.)
2. They gave the buyer (at best) incorrect info regarding the payment and shipment status of the item.
3. They had a chance to obtain a similar item but made a conscious (business) decision not to.
4. After buyer left feedback, Superior retaliated even thought they knew they were 100% wrong all along.
I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation.
<< <i>I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation. >>
An excellent, concise assessment.
<< <i>I think the lowest class thing Superior did was to leave negative feedback. Financially, I think they acted in a reasonable manner albeit obviously care more about their extra $200 than their reputation. >>
Agreed completely. The retaliation feedback was unnecessary and reflects even more poorly on them, IMO, than the way they've handled (and sometimes mishandled) this situation.
Personally, if I were them I think a few hundred bucks is a small price to pay to end this situation and keep reputation and integrity intact. But I'm not them, and I do think the OP was a little too pushy, belligerent and impatient in his demand for resolution.
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88.
<< <i>Beepy,
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88.
Lloyd, I'm just up the road from you (40 miles or so North) and if you send him a package, I'll throw in a brand spanking new Jefferson Dollar still in the original mint packaging, untouched by human hands (except those mint employees who I'm told were supposed to wear white cotton gloves) and then he'll have a nice representative example of that coin he missed out on
Lloyd BTW what did your daughter think of you giving away her piggy bank? (If she needs a lawyer let me know - I know a few good ones in your area
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
Newmismatist
Superior offered you a refund and an apology, so take it. According to their auction terms and conditions, I don't think you have any other recourse other than a refund.
If you feel that badly about them, take them to PNG arbitration or visit their offices personally and talk to them there instead of complaining to all of us about it.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>According to their auction terms and conditions >>
All else aside, I wonder what a court would think: Superior has "terms and conditions" that absolve them, and eBay has verbiage which states that each sale is a binding contract. I wonder if a court would uphold eBay's "binding contract" or Superior's "terms and conditions?"
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>Beepy,
e-mail me. I'll give you the change in my daughter's piggy bank. I know it is worth more than $154. You should be happy, then. Sorry, the weight of the piggy bank is UPS shipping of $17.88.
You better watch it Lloyd. He claims to be an "attorney at law"!
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
WOW!!! I seem to have struck a nerve, huh?
I'll respond to a couple of the common themes, to clarify a few things.
1) My auto signature line on this particular email account is my business signature, i.e., the one containing "Attorney at Law." I do find it interesting that including this information in an email is deemed inherently threatening by some, and preening by others. Is there another profession out there which the practitioners of should be ashamed of revealing, or at least should notify the public about only with reservation? I can't recall ever telling someone what I do for a living and the response being, "Don't you bully me!" Oh well.
2) Read my third post - the one to Newmismatist. From my perspective, this deal was a mistake followed by ineptitude, covered with a lie (actually a whole slew of 'em), and finished with a "we have other priorities." I'm still waiting for my first hint of honest-to-goodness customer service (instead of honey-coated brush offs) from this seller.
3) I'm not P.O.'d about not getting a "rip." In fact, I often set the prices I'm willing to pay for coins without any relation to the FMV of the coin. In several recent purchases, I think it fair to say I've even set the FMV for certain coins. I'm not ignorant of FMV, I just tend to buy what I want for what I think is fair for the coin. In this case, I bought (or at least thought I bought) low. In other cases, I buy high.
4) If I'm deemed forceful, boorish, overbearing, loudmouthed, full of myself, or otherwise off-putting by some, I'd ask those of you who classify me in this manner to put yourself in my shoes. I'm told why my coin is late, and that it is on the way. A few hours later, I get an email notifying me that there never was a coin in the first place. I don't know how you folks take being lied to, but I CAN'T STAND IT. Couple a lie with a brush-off, and I become oppositional right quick. Others may not, and I still respect their viewpoints.
5) "Beepy" = B.P., my initials.
6) The PR70 coin that sold for appx $53 was not the coin I bid on and won. My coin (so to speak) was a business strike.
7) 'Nuff said.