Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Wow... I read through all 16 pages of this...and aside from the brief chest thumping contest amongst a couple of the lawyers in the group, I found it very interesting.
One take on this is that it is a win for the hobby, and it is... but it's potentially a much bigger win for PCGS. Great PR bounce for being a defender of the hobby, plus causing just enough consternation that submissions, particularly for Secure Plus, will go up substantially. Having the stock symbol CLCT dropped into nearly every convo or printed story for good measure doesn't hurt, either.
As to Mark Chrans, I was wondering if/when his name was going to get mentioned. Does anyone think he is one of the "John Does" in the suit? For those who don't know him, he was considered a prodigy in the coin world in the early 80s, dropping out of high school at 16 to open a B/M coin storefront in Springfield, IL. He got a ton of publicity and was on the TV show "That's Incredible" circa 1980 telling everyone that would listen about how he was going to be a millionaire before age 30. By 1986 he was in Federal prison for a little less than a year for fraud and perjury. HERE is a link to a 2005 Toledo newspaper article giving a fairly good synopsis of Chrans' various woes, including ties to drug money and later to Tom Noe and the investment of OH state workers' funds into rare coins. Ouch.
Dellar's Darkener(tm), MS70(tm), Verdi-Gone(tm), just to name a few...a lawsuit like this could be bad for business, huh? Or wouldn't the use of said commercial products fit into this lawsuit's definition of "doctoring?"
I downloaded the lawsuit and plan to read it tonight.
A box full of pennies, a coin folder and a rainy afternoon with grandpa. We may not have made any money, but we sure made memories. Time to make some memories with another little girl. Pay it forward.
Scott A. Travers, a coin dealer and author who is considered a consumer protection advocate in the rare coin business, said “a number of” coin dealers have felony convictions.
<< <i>Scott A. Travers, a coin dealer and author who is considered a consumer protection advocate in the rare coin business, said “a number of” coin dealers have felony convictions.
Interesting comment.But who? >>
Clearly I can't speak first hand as to the environment as I didn't exist yet, but during the late 70s and early 80s people were throwing cash at dealers left and right and some of them got greedy and forgot to give Uncle Sam his cut. Either that or dealers forgot about form 8300 and got hammered for money laundering. I would guess that a majority of these felonies revolve around cash or taxes.
<< <i>Scott A. Travers, a coin dealer and author who is considered a consumer protection advocate in the rare coin business, said “a number of” coin dealers have felony convictions.
Interesting comment.But who? >>
Go to any coin show and throw up a small stone. Most likely, it will hit a felon.
So, where is PNG? Three of the individuals named in the suit are members of PNG. What is PNG doing? Where is their press release saying that they are looking into this situation?
Where is PNG's press release saying that coin-doctoring is a violation of their code of ethics?
Where is PNG's press release saying that they are considering suspending the membership of the three individuals?
As you may recall, this story broke at 4:30 Friday before a three-day weekend. There has been exactly one business day since. TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
This topic is a literal minefield for all involved and has the potential to turn into a major headache for many. I think most collectors and the public will see this as an important effort to clean up illegal and unsavory practices that are out there. I think the negative publicity is greatly overshadowed by the positive and will be very beneficial in the end. I look for the suit to be long and drawn-out, but some good has already been done by the filing of the suit, naming of particular individuals and specific coins, and this is already sending a chilling message to those who violate the PCGS dealer agreement.
<< <i>So, where is PNG? Three of the individuals named in the suit are members of PNG. What is PNG doing? Where is their press release saying that they are looking into this situation?
Where is PNG's press release saying that coin-doctoring is a violation of their code of ethics?
Where is PNG's press release saying that they are considering suspending the membership of the three individuals?
Does PNG's code of ethics have any value? >>
I would think that PNG isn't going to jump the gun and suspend anyone based on the initial filing alone. As professionals they will likely wait to consider sanctions, etc. until more details become clear. No one's been found liable for anything yet.
DrPete << I think most collectors and the public will see this [lawsuit] as an important effort to clean up illegal an unsavory practices that are out there. I think the negative publicity is greatly overshadowed by the positive and will be very beneficial in the end.>> I wish I had communicated this point as well as DrPete did.
I like the fact that DrPete is drawing attention to the fact that the positive impact of this lawsuit goes way beyond the fate of the six defendants. I will not comment here as to whether these six have committed the civil offenses (or breaches) of which they have been accused. It is more important that many others will be discouraged from coin doctoring, or will do so to a much lesser extent than before. I believe that coins have already been saved that would have been irreparably harmed, had this lawsuit never been filed.
In any event, I hope that the readers of this thread will also read my analysis of this lawsuit. I discuss the definition of coin doctoring, the impact of this suit, the number of active coin doctors, and whether coin doctoring is a crime, among other aspects of this topic.
The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings.
The PNG just does not get it. They are so full of themselves.
I was told by a dealer friend of mine Sil Digenova released a statement to the effect he is innocent and looks forward to proving that. This guy seems to be delusional.
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process???
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
They clearly took a side and that was with PCGS and the good of the hobby.
They even said they intend to review the rules passed regarding ethics and definitions going back 55 years.
They even imply they might go well beyond what PCGS has already done, "...through a more proactive posture regarding egregious acts of fraud in the numismatic marketplace."
no. It was better in olden times when you found the horse thieves with the horses and then hung em. Ask that girls parents in Peru if Van der Sloot should have been given due process.
If the PNG would just have kicked out these scum bags, it would have sent a serious message to all involved; ZERO TOLERANCE. Instead, their response was wishy, washy, playing both sides. Kind of like Finland (no offense to Finland)
I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing. Playing armchair quarterback, or in this case, armchair judge and jury serves no purpose. If they are found liable, by all means-boot them. But, last time I checked this was still America and they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law.
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint.
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process??? >>
PNG is a membership organization that does not need to wait until a civil complaint is finished. PNG can suspend membership if it thinks that dealers' actions violated their code of ethics, even if no money damages are ever awarded.
Here is what PNG's web-site says: ...our primary mission is to make the hobby safe for collectors and investors by maintaining rigid standards of excellence for our member dealers
PNG's wishy washy statement certainly does not represent rigid standards of excellence. PNG's failure to take any action against these three dealers is deplorable. Shame on PNG.
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process??? >>
PNG is a membership organization that does not need to wait until a civil complaint is finished. PNG can suspend membership if it thinks that dealers' actions violated their code of ethics, even if no money damages are ever awarded.
Here is what PNG's web-site says: ...our primary mission is to make the hobby safe for collectors and investors by maintaining rigid standards of excellence for our member dealers
PNG's wishy washy statement certainly does not represent rigid standards of excellence. PNG's failure to take any action against these three dealers is deplorable. Shame on PNG. >>
No, KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it.
Telephoto1 << No, KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it.>>
1) The PNG can, and has at least three times, suspended members without expelling them.
2) Recently, an East Coast dealer was suspended even though, as far as I know, there never has been a Court Ordered Judgment against him regarding coins or the coin business.
3) A few years ago, the PNG suspended a Southern California dealer who was accused (but never convicted or even tried) of a low-level felony that was unrelated to coins.
4) Laura Sperber has repeatedly argued, on the Legend website, that there are several PNG members, including past board members of the PNG, who are coin doctors or who are very much involved in coin doctoring activities. She was talking about more than three PNG members, not necessarily including any defendants in the present case.
Why do you strongly argue that the PNG should not have suspended any of the three PNG members who are defendants in the present case? I, too, am concerned about the rights of the defendants. Note that I did not mention their names in my recent analysis of this lawsuit. Nonetheless, should the PNG investigate these three in the near future regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit?
It is pertinent that CoinGuy1 in a post above states that he hopes but does NOT “expect” that the PNG “will back up their words with actions.”
What should the PNG do? What should collectors expect them to do?
To be well respected in any industry you have to be fair yet firm. When your negative actions affect the brand, you pay the price. Such as the NFL's Player Conduct Policy.
Telephoto1 said: No, KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something
Then, Analyst said: The PNG can, and has at least three times, suspended members without expelling them
Indeed, real professional organizations that are truly concerned about ethical behavior take action without waiting for final court adjudications. Instead of a coin doctor, here is an example of how a real doctor is handled based solely on an accusation: Seattle Doctor suspended based upon allegation of purchasing sex.
Of course, that is a real doctor, who lost his ability to practice because a real board of ethics was concerned about the public.
In this case, we don't have real doctors, we just three PNG members accused of a multi-million dollar racketeering charge called "coin doctoring". Of course, when we call these three individuals coin doctors, we all know they aren't really doctors. As a collector, I also now understand that, when we call PNG a professional organization, it is not really a professional organization. It's statements about high standards of ethics are fakes, like the high-end coins that these coin doctors have been selling.
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing. Playing armchair quarterback, or in this case, armchair judge and jury serves no purpose. If they are found liable, by all means-boot them. But, last time I checked this was still America and they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law.
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint. >>
Now let's not confuse these issues with thinking...
Translated: I'm with you 1000%.
<< <i>...KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it. >>
That PNG statement is the closest to sanity I've seen since this lawsuit was filed. In fact, to be brutally honest, unless these defendants have jackasses for attorneys, I'll be utterly shocked if any of the counts therein survive summary judgment. The blind spot, of course, is in the definitions.
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing. Playing armchair quarterback, or in this case, armchair judge and jury serves no purpose. If they are found liable, by all means-boot them. But, last time I checked this was still America and they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law.
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint. >>
Now let's not confuse these issues with thinking...
Translated: I'm with you 1000%.
<< <i>...KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it. >>
That PNG statement is the closest to sanity I've seen since this lawsuit was filed. In fact, to be brutally honest, unless these defendants have jackasses for attorneys, I'll be utterly shocked if any of the counts therein survive summary judgment. The blind spot, of course, is in the definitions.
FWIW, folks... >>
PCGS does not have to show that what the defendants did was wrong. And, I'm not even sure that they have to define coin doctoring. They need to prove that defendants breached a contract and that damage resulted. My guess, based on what I read in the complaint, is that PCGS has plenty of evidence to back that up. I don't understand why you think that would be so difficult.
I agree with telephoto and due process always seems to take a back seat a rope and a tree around these parts. The fact that the press release was at 4:30pm on a Friday before Memorial Day weekend was curious enough and exactly what kind of statement was PNG supposed hastily craft on the fly? I think the statement they did realease was timely and appropriate. I'm neither pro or con PNG as I don''t know enough about them. For what it's worth Silvano Digenova is set up two tables away from the PCGS table at the current Long Beach Show.
Again. I applaud PCGS for taking action against one of the industries dirty but not so secret issues. One can only hope all guilty parties are found gulity. I also hope all innocent parties are found innocent. , Simple enough. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
For what it's worth Silvano Digenova is set up two tables away from the PCGS table at the current Long Beach Show.
If I was at the show and saw him there I would have made a ruckus and spit right in his face. I would have been thrown out but it would have been worth it.
I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing
You are defending the dealers. PNG's priority is supposed to be protecting collectors, however.
Three members of PNG have been accused of participating in very serious unethical activities. These activities include a racketeering conspiracy to defraud collectors. These extremely serious claims are inconsistent with a member organization that promotes high standards of ethical conduct.
PNG should immediately act to suspend the membership of these three dealers. They should allow the dealers to have a hearing to present any reasons why they should be considered for re-instatement. Furthermore, PNG should publicly state that they will suspend members whenever a member-dealer becomes a defendent in a suit filed by NGC or PCGS with allegations of altering coins.
Similarly, ANA should take the position that these dealers cannot have tables at any ANA show or ANA meeting, until this matter is settled.
PNG's first priority, and ANA's first priority should be to protect collectors, not to protect dealers. Once PNG and ANA realize that their first priority is protecting collectors, coin dealers will benefit, because there will be increased public confidence in coin collecting.
You are defending the dealers. PNG's priority is supposed to be protecting collectors, however. Three members of PNG have been accused of participating in very serious unethical activities. These activities include a racketeering conspiracy to defraud collectors. These extremely serious claims are inconsistent with a member organization that promotes high standards of ethical conduct. PNG should immediately act to suspend the membership of these three dealers. They should allow the dealers to have a hearing to present any reasons why they should be considered for re-instatement. Furthermore, PNG should publicly state that they will suspend members whenever a member-dealer becomes a defendent in a suit filed by NGC or PCGS with allegations of altering coins. Similarly, ANA should take the position that these dealers cannot have tables at any ANA show or ANA meeting, until this matter is settled. PNG's first priority, and ANA's first priority should be to protect collectors, not to protect dealers. Once PNG and ANA realize that their first priority is protecting collectors, coin dealers will benefit, because there will be increased public confidence in coin collecting.
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing
You are defending the dealers. PNG's priority is supposed to be protecting collectors, however.
Three members of PNG have been accused of participating in very serious unethical activities. These activities include a racketeering conspiracy to defraud collectors. These extremely serious claims are inconsistent with a member organization that promotes high standards of ethical conduct.
PNG should immediately act to suspend the membership of these three dealers. They should allow the dealers to have a hearing to present any reasons why they should be considered for re-instatement. Furthermore, PNG should publicly state that they will suspend members whenever a member-dealer becomes a defendent in a suit filed by NGC or PCGS with allegations of altering coins.
Similarly, ANA should take the position that these dealers cannot have tables at any ANA show or ANA meeting, until this matter is settled.
PNG's first priority, and ANA's first priority should be to protect collectors, not to protect dealers. Once PNG and ANA realize that their first priority is protecting collectors, coin dealers will benefit, because there will be increased public confidence in coin collecting. >>
OK... first off, I'm not defending them just because they're dealers. I'm defending them because in this country they have a right to due process. Suppose you were accused of some wrongdoing...selling an altered coin perhaps. Not convicted, not shown any real proof tying you specifically to the wrongdoing... just accused by someone. By your own standard it should be perfectly OK for the ANA to suspend your membership, and for you to be banned from attending any shows or pursuing your hobby...based on an accusation, nothing more... and you'd be OK with it? If you say yes, you are not being truthful.
And this is what you want...based merely on an as-yet unproven accusation, you want these guys to be suspended from membership in organizations in which they are currently paid members in good standing...plus you would deny them the opportunity to make a living in their chosen profession based merely on that same unproven accusation. Did I just teleport into Russia by accident?
OK... first off, I'm not defending them just because they're dealers. I'm defending them because in this country they have a right to due process. Suppose you were accused of some wrongdoing...selling an altered coin perhaps. Not convicted, not shown any real proof tying you specifically to the wrongdoing... just accused by someone. By your own standard it should be perfectly OK for the ANA to suspend your membership, and for you to be banned from attending any shows or pursuing your hobby...based on an accusation, nothing more... and you'd be OK with it? If you say yes, you are not being truthful. And this is what you want...based merely on an as-yet unproven accusation, you want these guys to be suspended from membership in organizations in which they are currently paid members in good standing...plus you would deny them the opportunity to make a living in their chosen profession based merely on that same unproven accusation. Did I just teleport into Russia by accident?
Uh, yes. The evidence given is overwhelming. So what if a few more customers get sold doctored coins? A bucks a buck, right? Maybe you deal with these guys. I won't. This says an awful lot about your character. You have none. This is the same mentality the Catholic Church showed all these years with child molestation. I say enough is enough. All you dealers supporting your buddies: shame on you!!!
I hope people take notice of the responses posted here. Keep notes and name names.
This was posted in another thread by DMWJR - for those who don't know Doug, he is an attorney - and I think it is as good of a summation of the issue as any I have seen:
<<I would take the legal analysis in the article with a grain of salt. There are two main issues here to be resolved in the suit:
1. Breach of contract. The dealer agreement specifies certain things that a submitting dealer agrees he will not do (or knowingly do). It doesn't matter what it is, nor what anyone's definition of coin doctoring is. If the submitter did any of those things listed in the contract, there is liability. The challenge in the lawsuit will be to prove that the contracting party either did those things himself, or knowingly submitted coins that he knew were treated in the proscribed manner, and submitting them anyway. The definition of "coin doctoring" is irrelevant to any legal analysis on this issue. As a complete aside and for illustration purposes, if the agreement said the dealer would never breath on a coin before submission, and PCGS can prove that the dealer breathed on it, there is liability (not sure about damages, but a breach of contract nonetheless).
2. Fraud. The key thing here to me is that you don't have to be a direct party to the dealer agreement in order to be exposed to liability. This is PCGS's way of reaching beyond the submitter to the person who actually did the work on the coin. For success on the fraud allegation, there must be a false representation or concealment of a fact intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to their detriment, when they otherwise would not have. Again, I don't think a definition of coin doctoring is going to get us anywhere with this either. The issue will center around whether the defendant's act was intended to conceal or misrepresent the grade (and hence value) of the coin such that PCGS relied on the representation and has been harmed in the process. It's really no different that insurance fraud, and yes there is civil liability and criminal liability for fraud like this. You also have conspiracy if the submitter knew the coins were doctored when they submitted it.
Personally, I think the reference to the USC law regarding the alteration of legal tender is somewhat of a red herring and is there to spice up the lawsuit. It is not really relevant to the real issues in the case. Notwithstanding, I have seen judges hang their hats on more obscure things when deciding a case, and would have put it in the lawsuit if I had prepared the complaint.>>
Comments
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
<< <i>And what about Mark Chrans? Hmmmm? >>
Shirley you jest.........
<< <i>And what about Mark Chrans? Hmmmm? >>
Oh my. You mean.... Naah
I'm shocked!
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
<< <i>And what about Mark Chrans? Hmmmm? >>
Who is Mark Chrans?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>And what about Mark Chrans? Hmmmm? >>
Who is Mark Chrans? >>
Wow... I read through all 16 pages of this...and aside from the brief chest thumping contest amongst a couple of the lawyers in the group, I found it very interesting.
One take on this is that it is a win for the hobby, and it is... but it's potentially a much bigger win for PCGS. Great PR bounce for being a defender of the hobby, plus causing just enough consternation that submissions, particularly for Secure Plus, will go up substantially. Having the stock symbol CLCT dropped into nearly every convo or printed story for good measure doesn't hurt, either.
As to Mark Chrans, I was wondering if/when his name was going to get mentioned. Does anyone think he is one of the "John Does" in the suit? For those who don't know him, he was considered a prodigy in the coin world in the early 80s, dropping out of high school at 16 to open a B/M coin storefront in Springfield, IL. He got a ton of publicity and was on the TV show "That's Incredible" circa 1980 telling everyone that would listen about how he was going to be a millionaire before age 30. By 1986 he was in Federal prison for a little less than a year for fraud and perjury. HERE is a link to a 2005 Toledo newspaper article giving a fairly good synopsis of Chrans' various woes, including ties to drug money and later to Tom Noe and the investment of OH state workers' funds into rare coins. Ouch.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
I find myself asking this question.... What took them so long?
It's been getting worse.
I downloaded the lawsuit and plan to read it tonight.
<< <i>300! >>
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
Interesting comment.But who?
<< <i>Scott A. Travers, a coin dealer and author who is considered a consumer protection advocate in the rare coin business, said “a number of” coin dealers have felony convictions.
Interesting comment.But who? >>
Clearly I can't speak first hand as to the environment as I didn't exist yet, but during the late 70s and early 80s people were throwing cash at dealers left and right and some of them got greedy and forgot to give Uncle Sam his cut. Either that or dealers forgot about form 8300 and got hammered for money laundering. I would guess that a majority of these felonies revolve around cash or taxes.
<< <i>Scott A. Travers, a coin dealer and author who is considered a consumer protection advocate in the rare coin business, said “a number of” coin dealers have felony convictions.
Interesting comment.But who? >>
Go to any coin show and throw up a small stone. Most likely, it will hit a felon.
TRUTH
<< <i>Go to any coin show and throw up a small stone. Most likely, it will hit a felon.
Ah, yes. Love those IKES.
TRUTH
For newer members asking WTH? Link.
Typo.
Where is PNG's press release saying that coin-doctoring is a violation of their code of ethics?
Where is PNG's press release saying that they are considering suspending the membership of the three individuals?
Does PNG's code of ethics have any value?
TD
<< <i>So, where is PNG? Three of the individuals named in the suit are members of PNG. What is PNG doing? Where is their press release saying that they are looking into this situation?
Where is PNG's press release saying that coin-doctoring is a violation of their code of ethics?
Where is PNG's press release saying that they are considering suspending the membership of the three individuals?
Does PNG's code of ethics have any value? >>
I would think that PNG isn't going to jump the gun and suspend anyone based on the initial filing alone. As professionals they will likely wait to consider sanctions, etc. until more details become clear. No one's been found liable for anything yet.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
I like the fact that DrPete is drawing attention to the fact that the positive impact of this lawsuit goes way beyond the fate of the six defendants. I will not comment here as to whether these six have committed the civil offenses (or breaches) of which they have been accused. It is more important that many others will be discouraged from coin doctoring, or will do so to a much lesser extent than before. I believe that coins have already been saved that would have been irreparably harmed, had this lawsuit never been filed.
In any event, I hope that the readers of this thread will also read my analysis of this lawsuit. I discuss the definition of coin doctoring, the impact of this suit, the number of active coin doctors, and whether coin doctoring is a crime, among other aspects of this topic.
My Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors
Second Weekly column that includes a discussion of how NGC can employ technology, which the NGC already employs, to discourage coin doctoring
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings.
I was told by a dealer friend of mine Sil Digenova released a statement to the effect he is innocent and looks forward to proving that. This guy seems to be delusional.
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
link to press release
<< <i>
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
link to press release >>
Thanks for the link.
They've gone above and beyond what I expected and applaud them for their stance.
Shame on the PNG.
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process???
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
They clearly took a side and that was with PCGS and the good of the hobby.
They even said they intend to review the rules passed regarding ethics and definitions going back 55 years.
They even imply they might go well beyond what PCGS has already done, "...through a more proactive posture regarding egregious acts of fraud in the numismatic marketplace."
I have no idea what else they could have done.
no. It was better in olden times when you found the horse thieves with the horses and then hung em. Ask that girls parents in Peru if Van der Sloot should have been given due process.
If the PNG would just have kicked out these scum bags, it would have sent a serious message to all involved; ZERO TOLERANCE. Instead, their response was wishy, washy, playing both sides. Kind of like Finland (no offense to Finland)
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>That was a good statement by the PNG. >>
I agree, but hope (though don't expect) that they will back up their words with actions.
<< <i>
<< <i>The PNG has released a statement and is viewable on Coin Links website. The statement says precisely what it should say and is what a reasonable person would expect from the organization on this matter.
I have not come across a statement from ANA, but one would expect a similar statement, indicating support of policing the field of numismatics/coin collecting from fraud and racketeering, and keeping an eye on the lawsuit to take appropriate action (possible loss of membership?) against any ANA member found to be fraudulent by the legal proceedings. >>
link to press release >>
Thank you for posting the link to the PNG statement.
I agree with what others have said, this is a good statement, and an appropriate response at this point.
<< <i>
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process??? >>
PNG is a membership organization that does not need to wait until a civil complaint is finished. PNG can suspend membership if it thinks that dealers' actions violated their code of ethics, even if no money damages are ever awarded.
Here is what PNG's web-site says: ...our primary mission is to make the hobby safe for collectors and investors by maintaining rigid standards of excellence for our member dealers
PNG's wishy washy statement certainly does not represent rigid standards of excellence. PNG's failure to take any action against these three dealers is deplorable. Shame on PNG.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What a wishy, washy statement. NGC has done almost nothing and they congratulate them as well? Why not expel the scoundrels? Ok, innocent until proven guilty, blah, blah, blah. Make a strong statement or don't
Shame on the PNG. >>
You don't believe in due process??? >>
PNG is a membership organization that does not need to wait until a civil complaint is finished. PNG can suspend membership if it thinks that dealers' actions violated their code of ethics, even if no money damages are ever awarded.
Here is what PNG's web-site says: ...our primary mission is to make the hobby safe for collectors and investors by maintaining rigid standards of excellence for our member dealers
PNG's wishy washy statement certainly does not represent rigid standards of excellence. PNG's failure to take any action against these three dealers is deplorable. Shame on PNG. >>
No, KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
1) The PNG can, and has at least three times, suspended members without expelling them.
2) Recently, an East Coast dealer was suspended even though, as far as I know, there never has been a Court Ordered Judgment against him regarding coins or the coin business.
3) A few years ago, the PNG suspended a Southern California dealer who was accused (but never convicted or even tried) of a low-level felony that was unrelated to coins.
4) Laura Sperber has repeatedly argued, on the Legend website, that there are several PNG members, including past board members of the PNG, who are coin doctors or who are very much involved in coin doctoring activities. She was talking about more than three PNG members, not necessarily including any defendants in the present case.
Why do you strongly argue that the PNG should not have suspended any of the three PNG members who are defendants in the present case? I, too, am concerned about the rights of the defendants. Note that I did not mention their names in my recent analysis of this lawsuit. Nonetheless, should the PNG investigate these three in the near future regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit?
It is pertinent that CoinGuy1 in a post above states that he hopes but does NOT “expect” that the PNG “will back up their words with actions.”
What should the PNG do? What should collectors expect them to do?
Here is a thread in which the definition of coin doctoring and other issues relating to this lawsuit and its long-term effects are discussed
My Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors
Then, Analyst said: The PNG can, and has at least three times, suspended members without expelling them
Indeed, real professional organizations that are truly concerned about ethical behavior take action without waiting for final court adjudications. Instead of a coin doctor, here is an example of how a real doctor is handled based solely on an accusation: Seattle Doctor suspended based upon allegation of purchasing sex.
Of course, that is a real doctor, who lost his ability to practice because a real board of ethics was concerned about the public.
In this case, we don't have real doctors, we just three PNG members accused of a multi-million dollar racketeering charge called "coin doctoring". Of course, when we call these three individuals coin doctors, we all know they aren't really doctors. As a collector, I also now understand that, when we call PNG a professional organization, it is not really a professional organization. It's statements about high standards of ethics are fakes, like the high-end coins that these coin doctors have been selling.
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing. Playing armchair quarterback, or in this case, armchair judge and jury serves no purpose. If they are found liable, by all means-boot them. But, last time I checked this was still America and they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law.
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint. >>
Now let's not confuse these issues with thinking...
Translated: I'm with you 1000%.
<< <i>...KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it. >>
That PNG statement is the closest to sanity I've seen since this lawsuit was filed. In fact, to be brutally honest, unless these defendants have jackasses for attorneys, I'll be utterly shocked if any of the counts therein survive summary judgment. The blind spot, of course, is in the definitions.
FWIW, folks...
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing. Playing armchair quarterback, or in this case, armchair judge and jury serves no purpose. If they are found liable, by all means-boot them. But, last time I checked this was still America and they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law.
Also, unless PCGS has some ace in the hole, like a 'coin doctor' witness who can name names as to who he did work for, etc., it could be very difficult to prove that certain individuals were directly responsible for the doctoring. If they can't conclusively prove these guys were liable they could potentially have one heck of a defamation suit on their hands IMO...from dealers well-heeled enough to potentially take it to the max from a litigation standpoint. >>
Now let's not confuse these issues with thinking...
Translated: I'm with you 1000%.
<< <i>...KUDOS to PNG for not having a stupid kneejerk reaction and arbitrarily expelling someone simply because they were ACCUSED of something! It appears that, unlike some posters here evidently, the leadership of the PNG believes in a little document called the Constitution. Maybe you've heard of it. >>
That PNG statement is the closest to sanity I've seen since this lawsuit was filed. In fact, to be brutally honest, unless these defendants have jackasses for attorneys, I'll be utterly shocked if any of the counts therein survive summary judgment. The blind spot, of course, is in the definitions.
FWIW, folks... >>
PCGS does not have to show that what the defendants did was wrong. And, I'm not even sure that they have to define coin doctoring. They need to prove that defendants breached a contract and that damage resulted. My guess, based on what I read in the complaint, is that PCGS has plenty of evidence to back that up. I don't understand why you think that would be so difficult.
Again. I applaud PCGS for taking action against one of the industries dirty but not so secret issues. One can only hope all guilty parties are found gulity. I also hope all innocent parties are found innocent. , Simple enough. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
If I was at the show and saw him there I would have made a ruckus and spit right in his face. I would have been thrown out but it would have been worth it.
You are defending the dealers. PNG's priority is supposed to be protecting collectors, however.
Three members of PNG have been accused of participating in very serious unethical activities. These activities include a racketeering conspiracy to defraud collectors. These extremely serious claims are inconsistent with a member organization that promotes high standards of ethical conduct.
PNG should immediately act to suspend the membership of these three dealers. They should allow the dealers to have a hearing to present any reasons why they should be considered for re-instatement. Furthermore, PNG should publicly state that they will suspend members whenever a member-dealer becomes a defendent in a suit filed by NGC or PCGS with allegations of altering coins.
Similarly, ANA should take the position that these dealers cannot have tables at any ANA show or ANA meeting, until this matter is settled.
PNG's first priority, and ANA's first priority should be to protect collectors, not to protect dealers. Once PNG and ANA realize that their first priority is protecting collectors, coin dealers will benefit, because there will be increased public confidence in coin collecting.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
BRAVO!!!
<< <i>I'm trying to understand why some people have a lynchmob mentality and think that PNG & ANA should just boot these guys immediately with zero proof as yet of any wrongdoing
You are defending the dealers. PNG's priority is supposed to be protecting collectors, however.
Three members of PNG have been accused of participating in very serious unethical activities. These activities include a racketeering conspiracy to defraud collectors. These extremely serious claims are inconsistent with a member organization that promotes high standards of ethical conduct.
PNG should immediately act to suspend the membership of these three dealers. They should allow the dealers to have a hearing to present any reasons why they should be considered for re-instatement. Furthermore, PNG should publicly state that they will suspend members whenever a member-dealer becomes a defendent in a suit filed by NGC or PCGS with allegations of altering coins.
Similarly, ANA should take the position that these dealers cannot have tables at any ANA show or ANA meeting, until this matter is settled.
PNG's first priority, and ANA's first priority should be to protect collectors, not to protect dealers. Once PNG and ANA realize that their first priority is protecting collectors, coin dealers will benefit, because there will be increased public confidence in coin collecting. >>
OK... first off, I'm not defending them just because they're dealers. I'm defending them because in this country they have a right to due process. Suppose you were accused of some wrongdoing...selling an altered coin perhaps. Not convicted, not shown any real proof tying you specifically to the wrongdoing... just accused by someone. By your own standard it should be perfectly OK for the ANA to suspend your membership, and for you to be banned from attending any shows or pursuing your hobby...based on an accusation, nothing more... and you'd be OK with it? If you say yes, you are not being truthful.
And this is what you want...based merely on an as-yet unproven accusation, you want these guys to be suspended from membership in organizations in which they are currently paid members in good standing...plus you would deny them the opportunity to make a living in their chosen profession based merely on that same unproven accusation. Did I just teleport into Russia by accident?
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Uh, yes. The evidence given is overwhelming. So what if a few more customers get sold doctored coins? A bucks a buck, right? Maybe you deal with these guys. I won't. This says an awful lot about your character. You have none. This is the same mentality the Catholic Church showed all these years with child molestation. I say enough is enough. All you dealers supporting your buddies: shame on you!!!
I hope people take notice of the responses posted here. Keep notes and name names.
<<I would take the legal analysis in the article with a grain of salt. There are two main issues here to be resolved in the suit:
1. Breach of contract. The dealer agreement specifies certain things that a submitting dealer agrees he will not do (or knowingly do). It doesn't matter what it is, nor what anyone's definition of coin doctoring is. If the submitter did any of those things listed in the contract, there is liability. The challenge in the lawsuit will be to prove that the contracting party either did those things himself, or knowingly submitted coins that he knew were treated in the proscribed manner, and submitting them anyway. The definition of "coin doctoring" is irrelevant to any legal analysis on this issue. As a complete aside and for illustration purposes, if the agreement said the dealer would never breath on a coin before submission, and PCGS can prove that the dealer breathed on it, there is liability (not sure about damages, but a breach of contract nonetheless).
2. Fraud. The key thing here to me is that you don't have to be a direct party to the dealer agreement in order to be exposed to liability. This is PCGS's way of reaching beyond the submitter to the person who actually did the work on the coin. For success on the fraud allegation, there must be a false representation or concealment of a fact intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to their detriment, when they otherwise would not have. Again, I don't think a definition of coin doctoring is going to get us anywhere with this either. The issue will center around whether the defendant's act was intended to conceal or misrepresent the grade (and hence value) of the coin such that PCGS relied on the representation and has been harmed in the process. It's really no different that insurance fraud, and yes there is civil liability and criminal liability for fraud like this. You also have conspiracy if the submitter knew the coins were doctored when they submitted it.
Personally, I think the reference to the USC law regarding the alteration of legal tender is somewhat of a red herring and is there to spice up the lawsuit. It is not really relevant to the real issues in the case. Notwithstanding, I have seen judges hang their hats on more obscure things when deciding a case, and would have put it in the lawsuit if I had prepared the complaint.>>