Manipulating PCGS holdered coins. Legal implications???

deansmint

Im sure most everyone on the forum has read the thread pertaining to MOC. Im wondering what your opinions are regarding the legal implications, if any, that could come from the intentional manipulation of PCGS holdered coins? Does PCGS have any recourse legaly? I know there are a few posters who have legal backgrounds who may not be willing to put their legal opinions on the line, but what about the collectors in general? What say you???

mgoodm3

unlikely.

deansmint

Am I the only one who thinks that the only thing PCGS could do in this situation is file charges. I would think that every collector who holds PCGS certified coins in their collection would be worried that the decreased perception of infalibility could cost them value in their coins. Essentially everyone has been harmed by this, everyone has had 'money' stolen from them because of this. If just one collector leaves the market because of this then everyone suffers. As far as legally, I would have to think that by manipulating a coin that PCGS have given an opinion on, and then continuing to use that opinion on the manipulated coin in order to make a profit IS FRAUD. The damage that has been done to PCGS's reputation and business is worth a lot more than the value of the coins in question.

tmot99

I would think PCGS doesn't have a leg to stand on. Their old slabs were not air tight and therefore susceptable to toning whether it be NT or AT.

ziggy29

I don't see how any laws have been broken. Ethical boundaries, yes, but laws? I don't think so.

ABC123

Does FRAUD come to mind ?

Longacre

I'm a mere tax lawyer. Not a "real" lawyer as some say. I literally shake with fear just from the thought of entering a courtroom with a seasoned litigator. I tend to hide behind my pile of Internal Revenue Code books and Treasury Regulations.

Oh yea, I have not clue if PCGS has any recourse

Barry

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe one must PROVE damages in a civil suit. I believe that would be impossible for PCGS to do.

Also, the whole AT/NT issue is so nebulous and a matter of opinion.

rgl1345

You don't work for the Boulder Colorado DA's office do you?

deansmint

<< <i>You don't work for the Boulder Colorado DA's office do you? >>



If I did I would be filing charges against Karr for wasting taxpayers money, what a sick fool!!!

PonyExpress8

I don't know. PCGS has a lot to protect here and this is a serious matter. But ultimately it comes down to $ and sense.

This is not an easy call to make in my view for the leading TPG firm.

Petarded

Perhaps MOC could team up with PCGS (for that matter, NGC also) and help make the holders more secure...you know, kinda like the 'former burglars' on the Discovery channel (or whatever channel its on) that are paid to bust into and bust up your house, just to teach you a lesson to more tightly secure your home to prevent break ins.....or, those that go to work for the Feds (like that DiCaprio movie, in which he was a check forger, did time, then went to work for them in that particular dept.).

RBinTex

As for their recourse:

They'd have to proove up damages resulting from the hit to their reputation.

More importantly, they may have some REAL liability:

I guess the reasonable person standard would have to be applied.

No reasonable person should believe that a company can make a 100% tamper-proof slab.

Now if a company claims their slabs are 100% tamper-proof I think they'd face legal liability if it can be shown that that claim is false.

If not, it would be highly questionable UNLESS they were SO careless as to make their slabs "easily" tampered with.

Of course, in the absense of a claim of "totally tamper-proof", the legal battle would be over the definition of "easily" - IMHO.

rgl1345

<< <i>

<< <i>You don't work for the Boulder Colorado DA's office do you? >>



If I did I would be filing charges against Karr for wasting taxpayers money, what a sick fool!!! >>



I rest my case your Honor!

majorbigtime

<< <i>I'm not a lawyer, but I believe one must PROVE damages in a civil suit. I believe that would be impossible for PCGS to do.

>>




Absolutely--try to find your recourse in the guarantee of authenticity. It's deceptive and misleading IMO.

deansmint

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm not a lawyer, but I believe one must PROVE damages in a civil suit. I believe that would be impossible for PCGS to do.

>>




Absolutely--try to find your recourse in the guarantee of authenticity. It's deceptive and misleading IMO. >>



This isn't about anyone using PCGS's guarantee of authenticity against them, this is about the fraudulant use of PCGS's reputation in order to profit. Maybe you can think of it in terms of somebody breaking out a coin from a PCGS holder and then replacing it with an entirely different coin, essentially utilizing PCGS's opinion other than for what it was intended. I guess you have to wonder if toning the coin inside the holder is drastic enough to be considered of the same deception.

majorbigtime

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm not a lawyer, but I believe one must PROVE damages in a civil suit. I believe that would be impossible for PCGS to do.

>>




Absolutely--try to find your recourse in the guarantee of authenticity. It's deceptive and misleading IMO. >>



This isn't about anyone using PCGS's guarantee of authenticity against them, this is about the fraudulant use of PCGS's reputation in order to profit. Maybe you can think of it in terms of somebody breaking out a coin from a PCGS holder and then replacing it with an entirely different coin, essentially utilizing PCGS's opinion other than for what it was intended. I guess you have to wonder if toning the coin inside the holder is drastic enough to be considered of the same deception. >>





Your point is well taken and valid. So is mine.

PCGS won't suffer any losses to constitute monetary damages under the so-called "guarantees". No pain, no gain.