What if a NGC slabbed coin is a fake?

worldcoinguy

What is the policy/procedure to pursue if you purchase an NGC coin, and later discover it is not genuine? Has it ever happened to anybody on the forum?

worldcoinguy

I didn't look through NGC's website close enough. Here is a partial answer to my own question.

WARNING: THIS GUARANTEE IS LIMITED.
1). Oxidation can continue to occur after sealing, and copper coins are particularly susceptible to this problem. Therefore, the NGC Guarantee does not apply to the grading of copper coins.
2). Pattern coins and coins graded under the VarietyPlus and Mint Error services are guaranteed for grade and authenticity only.
3). The NGC Guarantee does not cover coins which have been graded by NGC but then are subjected to abuse, alteration, or improper storage conditions such as (but not limited to) extreme temperature, moisture, damaging environmental conditions, excessive light, excessive motion or vibration, or any other extreme conditions.
4). The NGC Guarantee does not apply to coins that have been removed at any time from their original NGC holder, or to coins with tampered holders.
5). The NGC Guarantee does not apply to clerical errors on the label.

Aethelred

What do you have that you suspect may not be real?

worldcoinguy

You are right - I'll get right to the question that triggered the posting. I was considering the purchase of the following taler on eBay.
ebay link - 1621 taler

However, I could not find it in my Krause. I decided to use coinarchives.com to find a match. After some searching, I found a match (link #1), but strangely the die has quite a few differences (below bust on obverse at 4:30 is different, collar near chin is different, etc). I was suspicious that one of the coins could possibly be not legitimate, this my question. Once I figured out that the DAV was most likely 3168, I found #2 and #3 below, which do appear to match the die in the NGC slab on eBay. Maybe the dies have a wide degree of differences?

link #1 - 1621 taler


link #2 - 1621 taler


link #3 - 1621 taler

coinkat

Unfortunately, Austria is not my specialty... but I think that you are likely right in part about the dies. There could be an obverse 1, obverse 2 and obverse 3 for this year. Another possibility is that one could be a pattern... The thing that bothers me about this is the variation is significant enough that someone would have/should have noticed this already and it would be accounted for... (I would think).

Keep in mind the 1696 English Crown has different obverses... I believe there are 3 and one is a pattern.

As for the real question, I believe NGC would take care of any authentication issues

Hussulo

2). Pattern coins and coins graded under the VarietyPlus and Mint Error services are guaranteed for grade and authenticity only.

So if you were to buy a slabbed British coin that was supposed to be of a rarer type and it turned out to be a normal variety you cannot claim its value from NGC?
This doesn't seem very fair. You might have paid over the odds for it because it was designated a rare variety. If this is the case they shouldn't mention any varieties and only the date and denomination.

CIVITAS

I can't see the link to your eBay item because it goes to the "My eBay" page. But, if the coin is in an NGC holder, odds are way against it being a forgery. I'm sure they've slabbed fakes before, but certainly very few.

I'm sure the dies varied quite a bit on these. Think of all the varieties of late 1700s US Bust Dollars. I'm sure 170 years earlier in Austria, things were no different.

worldcoinguy

Thanks for the feedback. The item in question was 120171942457 on eBay. I find the variety of dies to be quite interesting, but I just do not have the experience or exposure to sufficient coins to be competent on the topic. My immediate reaction was that the taler on coinarchives was different, thus the NGC slabbed one must suspicious. Bad logic to apply in this scenario with multiple possible dies.

worldcoinguy

<< <i>So if you were to buy a slabbed British coin that was supposed to be of a rarer type and it turned out to be a normal variety you cannot claim its value from NGC? >>



I would hope not. I think we are in agreement here. PCGS and NGC offer professional opinions on the grade and attributions of coins. The key word here is opinions. People make wrong assumptions, and sometimes coins go out the door with the wrong labels. I would not expect NGC to be liable in the event a coin was attributed wrong or mislabeled, as it should be the buyer's responsibility to check all the facts before buying. Situations like that could kill a business. In this particular case, I decided to take a leap of faith and make the purchase knowing that the label was incorrect, but not expecting anything from NGC (unless of course I would resumbit it to correct the label).

Hussulo

I am in agreement with you that mistakes in labeling/typos do happen, we are all human after all, but labeling a coin a certain variety or pattern is a conscious decision. I believe that if you are stating that a certain coin is of a certain type or pattern you should back up your “professional” statement. Otherwise in my opinion just grade the coin and don't bother with its variety. If you do less knowledgeable collectors might buy a coin paying over the odds for it thinking its a rare variety because they (and here comes the big word in this whole argument) trust your grading standards and professional numismatic knowledge. After all if all collectors could grade and attribute coins what would be the point in having TGP's? Are we not after all paying for their professional assessment of the said coin and not just the plastic the coin comes in? and is each TGP's professional assessment not what separates the good TGP's from the bad.

I also don't believe that “Situations like that could kill a business “ unless the TGP's were consistently miss- attributing coins, which I honestly don't believe they are. What we are talking about is probably a very small minority of cases if any.

Sorry I don't want to sound like I'm having a right rant and I'm not directing it at you worldcoinguy but I was just a little taken back when I read NGC'c policies.

Disclaimer: I am not anti-NGC in any way. I have several NGC graded coins and will still buy more. However my thoughts are that ALL TPGs should offer a full market value guarantee on the coin that is stated to be in their holder.

worldcoinguy

Rant away my friend - no offense taken. The coins I generally pursue do not have much specialization in terms of varieties or patterns, so I probably do not have a appreciation for the potential variance in prices that exist.

I think the real test would come in the interpretation of #2 (Pattern coins and coins graded under the VarietyPlus and Mint Error services are guaranteed for grade and authenticity only). If a coin does NOT use the VarietyPlus service, and it is not correctly attributed, then I would read that you do not have recourse back against NGC. If it IS graded using the special service, then you would have recourse against NGC. I suppose this would caution somebody from purchasing a so-called “variety” coin that is in an unattributed holder. The website only mentions US coins, so I question if any of this is applicable to world coins.

worldcoinguy

I also find NGC’s policies on copper, bronze, and nickel coins to be interesting. I was not aware that there was a 10 year expiration on the guarantee if I am reading this correctly. I am not sure how the average consumer would be able to determine the encapsulation date?

Q. Are all coins certified & encapsulated by NGC covered by the NGC guarantee?
A. The NGC Guarantee does not apply to copper, bronze or copper nickel coins graded by NGC prior to April 1, 2000. To the extent that the NGC Guarantee applies to copper, bronze, or copper nickel coins, the NGC Guarantee expires with respect to such coin(s) on the ten year anniversary of the date of encapsulation by NGC. Additionally, any NGC certified coin deemed by us to be representative of a clerical error is not covered by the NGC guarantee. Clerical errors may be returned to NGC for correction of labeling at no charge to the submitter.


Disclaimer: I am not anti-NGC in any way.....just trying to better understand the "fine print".