Hypothetical--your heirs sell a raw set of Mercury dimes.

fcloud

You are a Mercury Dime collector. You getting old and your eyes just aren't as good as they used to be. You place a raw 1942/41-D in the 1942-D hole in your album in your raw set. You pass away. Your heirs take your set to a dealer. The dealer doesn't take the time to really look at the coins in the album and makes a standard offer based on nothing special in the set.

A few weeks go by and a young numimatist goes into the shop and want to look at that set of Mercury dimes. The youth finds the 1942/41-D in the album. Does the dealer call your heirs and offer to pay them additional money becuase they found a rare coin mixed in the generic set he purchase from them?

Edited to correct spelling

tmot99

I doubt they would even remember unless it was just a day or two. I would think they get Mercury dime sets so often that they wouldn't be able to relate a particular set to a particular seller.

It would be nice if a dealer did that, but I would bet it rarely if ever happens. I also don't think the dealer would be obligated to call.

Hyperion

>>>
>>> "You pass away"
>>>

Id probably stop caring at this point.

fcloud

<< <i> You pass away >>





<< <i>Id probably stop caring at this point. >>



So then in your opinion it is okay for a dealer to rip someone off?

BigD5

It might have been the responsibility of the "heirs" to ascertain exactly what they had, which would probably entail taking the set to 2 or 3 different dealers for opinions. I'm sure 2 or 3 dealers wouldn't have missed that overdate, and full value would have most likely been realized.

Once they allowed the set to be sold for whatever the value, they forfeited ownership and in their haste, sold the set "short".

I'm not sure if your dealer example "ripped them off" in this scenario. Sounds more like lazy heirs and a lazy dealer.

The dealer can quote whatever price they want. It's the decision of the seller to either accept the offer, or pass. If the seller doesn't do any research and takes the first offer they get, blindly, who's fault is that?

Robgetty

You skipped the part where the young numismatist rips the dealer by buying the
generic dime set without mentioning the 42/41 he noticed.

fcloud

<< <i>You skipped the part where the young numismatist rips the dealer by buying the
generic dime set without mentioning the 42/41 he noticed. >>



I skipped it on purpose.
The dealer sold it to the kid as a 1942/41-D at a discount. The basis of the story is true from a local dealer. He purchased the set from someone and didn't look at it. A kid found the coin and told the dealer, the dealer gave the kid a pretty good discount, but he made plenty on the coin. This happened in or about the year 2000. The coin was a "fine" according to what the dealer had told me.

I used this tread to show how the dealers in my area would handle this type of situation. I think dealers need to check the items they purchase thoroughly. I think it is more the dealers responsibility than the seller. Many times the seller is selling coins left to them by a family member who passed. I don't expect these novices to become numismatist to sell the coins. My wife and kids have specifics on where to sell when I pass (hopefully I will live until I'm a ripe old age, but we just can't even count on tomorrow).

I also wanted to see the different attitudes on this versus the four hypotheticals from MrEureka. It is interesting to see that the seller is at fault when it is a collector, and when a dealer accidentally sells extra coins, it is the collector who is suppose to alert the dealer of the error and return the coin(s) because they are the rightful owner. What about the seller who got stiffed!

BigD5

It's the sellers responsibility to know what they have, regardless as to whether the seller is a dealer or collector.

Of course the heirs are not going to be expected to be numismatists, but don't they have a responsibility to show that set to at least two differerent dealers instead of simply walking into a shop and selling the set blindly? If they do a tiny bit of legwork, they should get a fair offer for what they have. If they aren't willing to do any research or legwork, then they get the first offer they receive which may or may not be "fair".

mirabela

I don't know about the earlier 'Capitol holder' hypotheticals, but this one does happen. When I was about nine years old, I bought a mostly complete set of mercs in a Whitman folder, basically at melt. I owned the thing for more than twenty years, and looked at it hundreds of times, before I discovered that the nice Fine+ coin in the 19-D spot was a 1921-D. Sometimes we only see what we expect to. It happens.

By the time I caught on, I had thought my merc set was complete for some time, and was already moving on to other things. I never did own a 19-D, either...

tincup

95% of the dealers probably would not. Also, I am skeptical that the person who was looking at the set for purchase would even make a comment about his find.....

Conder101

<< <i><< You pass away >>

<< Id probably stop caring at this point. >>

So then in your opinion it is okay for a dealer to rip someone off? >>


If the seller isn't interested in taking any time to determine at least the neighborhood of the value of what they are selling (They just want quick cash.), well no I would hope they don't get ripped, but if they do well too bad. (Spoken as someone whose heirs will probably one day be on the receiving end of the rip. The collection is for my enjoyment, I don't owe my heirs a maximm return, they can have whatever they can get. If they leave money on the table it won't matter that much to me, I'm dead.)



<< <i>I'm not sure if your dealer example "ripped them off" in this scenario. Sounds more like lazy heirs and a lazy dealer. >>


I would have to agree, especially since the 42/1-D dime was still stuck in the album as a generic when the dealer gave it to "Young Numismatist" to look at for possible purchase. It was stated that the dealer didn't look at the set very closely so he was not deliberately trying to rip them off.

As for trying to contact the heirs, if he bought it basicly as silver he probably put it with the rest of the bulk silver he bought and possibly doesn't even remember who he bought that specific set from.

homerunhall

This is the age old dealer ethic question...

How much do you tell an uninformed seller???????

I have personally seen the following back in the 1970s...

An original roll of 40 Gem BU 1930 Standing Liberty quarters purchased over-the-counter at a coin shop for silver value.

Several rolls of Uncidculated BTW commems purchased over-the-counter at a coin shop for silver value.

Did the dealer do anything wrong?????

I feel this is a persoanl ethics question that each individual should answer personally.

There actually are some legal guidelines and there have been some legal cases resolving this matter. I know of one in the sports memorabilia market that involved a 7 figure item.

As for the 1942/1-D dime example...this seems gray area to ma and one where the dealer should make up his own mind.

hr

MikeJessie1

I actually keep records and have advise both my wife and oldest daughter of its contents and methods of disposal of my collection. We all eventually will pass, so I figure its my responsibility to protect my familys interest in the future as I protect my collection now!

fcloud

If it is the sellers responsibility to know what they are selling, then when a dealer is the seller of two 1916-D coins for the price of one, it must be their loss. See the hypothetical on the 1916-D.

lordmarcovan

I watched one dealer buy some pretty nice Saints for melt value.

Later I asked him, "How can you sleep at night?"

"Like a baby," he said.