Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action.
The PNG is responsible for its members and their standards. The ANA is responsible for its membership, as well.
The PNG has standards that are in place for the protection of the public, especially our customers.
It is not up to the PNG to define coin doctoring.
We may have some additions/corrections when coin doctoring is defined, but we are not numismatics as a whole and do not define numismatic terminology.
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
Should taking a coin that have problems and making it permanently better (taking all things into consideration) be a bad thing? >>
That is called conservation. Doctoring is about deception. To a coin doctor, permanent is often long enough to get the coin graded, put into a holder and hopefully into the hands of a collector before the evidence of his work becomes noticeable.
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
I like your logic... a coin doctor dealer member in the PNG is like a spouse; it's cheaper to keep 'em!
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
To me the PNG now looks like it is ignoring the elephant standing in the middle of the room. I agree with Mr Eureka, the PNG is not the problem, but it is unclear whether it will be part of the solution. I think even a press release stating its position, more definitively and forcefully than it has so far on this would help. I agree, there needs to be due process and a fair approach to members that have been implicated by the PNG. Perhaps thats what should be discussed, what is the PNG process for dealing with cases like this?
<< <i>While Dave E's characterization of the PNG may be offensive to you and others, you must admit that they (PNG leaders) have brought this attitude upon themselves with their official action, or lack of action as the case may be. The question still is---part of the problem or part of the solution?
I don't see PNG as "part of the problem". As to whether or not they will be "part of the solution", the jury is still out. >>
Good point, but the PNG is still part of the proverbial loop, and if the loop is severed where the said entities exist within the folds of the flock, the problem may have an eventual end. Maybe not a final end to the problem, but at least the PNG will have a clear stand on ethics.
Note: I am not a member of the PNG, I have however read their charter and by these actions being discussed here, the group is clearly dodging an issue here.
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
Even without the recently-dropped definition of coin doctoring, the following language is in the PNG Code Of Ethics: "7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action.
And the oft repeated response/suggestion that someone can file a complaint with the PNG, if they have been sold a doctored coin by a PNG member, sounds anything other than proactive on this issue, and like a giant cop out.
I repeat, the current PNG Code Of Ethics, as listed on their website, reads:
"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
Do the majority of PNG members really believe that such activities aren't occurring on a large scale basis? How about addressing it?
So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled?
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances? I'd put the chances at less than 50-50.
So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled?
The PNG will say something stupid like:" lack of proof"
Its not all PNG members who are bad. BUT, if the organization really wants to be king, it should always be out there persuading anyone that coin doctoring is bad. It should also make everyo read and repeat its by laws about the subject and sign a form stating they read it and understood.
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances? I'd put the chances at less than 50-50. >>
I do not think that a member would be expelled for selling one doctored coin, however a pattern could certainly lead to expulsion. Also, failure to live up to an arbitration finding or agreement would be grounds for expulsion.
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
So we expel them, then what? Would they not continue as usual likely losing a fraction or less of their business? The only way to motivate people like this is through their pocket books and frankly throwing them out of the PNG won't accomplish that. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled?
I suppose that could work, but it wouldn't stop the doctor from doctoring coins. If anything, he would ramp up the doctoring side of his business.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I have no need for the PNG , nor do I have any respect for their organization or their membership .
These threads I have been reading , the responses posted from PNG members , disgust me .
It is disgusting that the PNG should even exist . I condemn the PNG in the strongest vein allowable under the law and as my right as a citizen of the United States of America.
<< <i>From what I have read, the PNG does have plenty of evidence against the scum in the lawsuit. They are still proud members. >>
Please tell me about the evidence.
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
Coin doctoring is an epidemic that threatens the very fabric of the hobby I so dearly love , and I am so distraught by the impotence of the PNG that I swear before God Almighty that
I will never again knowingly buy a coin from a PNG member for as long as I shall live .
Even if this means I am never to add another single solitary coin to my existing collection and find myself leaving my lifelong obsession of collecting for another venue .
That is how strongly I feel about this issue, and I have drawn my line in the sand
<< <i>Coin doctoring is an epidemic that threatens the very fabric of the hobby I so dearly love , and I am so distraught by the impotence of the PNG that I swear before God Almighty that
I will never again knowingly buy a coin from a PNG member for as long as I shall live .
Even if this means I am never to add another single solitary coin to my existing collection and find myself leaving my lifelong obsession of collecting for another venue .
That is how strongly I feel about this issue, and I have drawn my line in the sand >>
The good thing about drawing a line in the sand... either wind or water will erase that line in very short order.
Expulsion plus a place of honor in the "Expelled PNG Members" column in Coin World/NN/Numismatist might work. If enough people feel like PawPaul, the boycott of advertisers in any publication who refuses to publish the list should help. My complaint is about disclosure, more than doctoring. There should be a lifetime warranty against undisclosed doctoring, as I believe there is with counterfeits. I know dealers who personally have such warranties, but it should be part of the PNG Code of Ethics. Likewise auction companies should have terms in their contracts allowing remedies against consignors.
<< <i>From what I have read, the PNG does have plenty of evidence against the scum in the lawsuit. They are still proud members. >>
Please tell me about the evidence. >>
I believe that a number of coins submitted for grading were not returned and instead retained as evidence when the suit was filed.
PNG is more than 50 years old, and if it's members want their membership to inspire confidence in the minds of potential (and current) customers, then something CONCRETE needs to be done (vs. continued obfuscation---AKA sticking one's head in the sand). Looking through the current membership list, I see that there are fine dealers, and well as some whom I would charitably characterize as sharks. I have been collecting coins, off and on, for decades. I left the hobby for ca. 15 years precisely because I was fed up with being ripped off by a number of dealers (one of them is a current PNG member). The continuing allure of classic coins brought me back---only now I am FAR more cynical. I routinely tell new collectors that one of the most important things to do early on is figure out who the good dealers (both fair and knowledgeable) are and stick with them. Too bad I don't feel comfortable referring newbies to the PNG dealers list.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
<< <i>So we expel them, then what? Would they not continue as usual likely losing a fraction or less of their business? The only way to motivate people like this is through their pocket books and frankly throwing them out of the PNG won't accomplish that. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. >>
Maybe it wouldn't hurt their business, but keeping them in the same organization sure doesn't seem to help with how that org is viewed.
Imagine an organization that is commited to helping others financially. Then, they find they have an embezzler in their midst. They decide to keep the embezzler in their midst because it is better to have them close to watch over them????
I would say, it is better to have an open and honest organization of folks and not allow those that have shown their tactics to be dubious, at best.
Note: As a collector, when I see "PNG member", I pay less than zero attention to it. Not saying that is only because of this thread, but the reasons for this thread are certainly a large part of it. I am thinking that the benefits to a deal being part of the PNG revolve around folks who are new to the industry, or possibly part of the "in-crowd". For the vast majority of collectors, I don't think there really is a benefit to dealing with a PNG dealer.
<< <i>... My complaint is about disclosure, more than doctoring. There should be a lifetime warranty against undisclosed doctoring, as I believe there is with counterfeits. I know dealers who personally have such warranties, but it should be part of the PNG Code of Ethics. . >>
It IS part of the PNG Code Of Ethics - as I posted earlier in this thread:
"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
<< <i>I think we as a group make a formal complaint and have as many as possible sign it.
If that does not work then . boycott ALL PNG dealers until something is done. Unfortunately some very fine dealers may get hurt, but they leave very little recourse. >>
Well............boycott all but 2, maybe.
successful BST deals with Meltdown, Broadstruck, lordmarcovan, MisterTicToc, JINX86, BXBOY143, MBCOINS and others
"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
Of course we could argue all day about what that means, but I'm pretty sure that the PNG Board, Executive Director and legal counsel would all agree that the above clause only covers doctoring cases where metal is moved or added to the coin.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The PNG has rules in place that concern fraud. Coin doctoring constitutes fraud. If you have been a victim of a PNG dealer that has sold you a doctored coin, please contact Robert Brueggeman, executive director, and he will get you a proper remedy. >>
That is absolutely unacceptable. Instead of banning their members from doctoring coins, or SELLING doctored coins, it's up to the buyer of a coin to CATCH the fact that he has been sold a doctored coin, and then file a complaint. >>
If it is found that the coin had been doctored with the offender be ejected from the PNG? Or will the buyer just get their money back?
<< <i>"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
Of course we could argue all day about what that means, but I'm pretty sure that the PNG Board, Executive Director and legal counsel would all agree that the above clause only covers doctoring cases where metal is moved or added to the coin. >>
And that one or more current PNG members have been accused of such.
Yet, to my knowledge, they have not been investigated by the PNG. And if Julian is correct, that's because no formal complaint has been brought against them. Should that really be required before the PNG takes ANY action?
<< <i> One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i> One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation.
<< <i> One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation. >>
What if Mark sues me for being ugly, should the PNG investigate? Anyone can be sued for anything.
If anyone was charged by a law enforcement unit, I am pretty sure that there would have been an investigation. As it is, I am certain that the PNG board is aware of the law suit, but absent a formal complaint.......
As for a boycott against PNG members, that clearly doesn't make any sense to serious numismatists.
The PNG will act on complaints. I absolutely guarantee it!!
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
<< <i> One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation. >>
What if Mark sues me for being ugly, should the PNG investigate? Anyone can be sued for anything.
If anyone was charged by a law enforcement unit, I am pretty sure that there would have been an investigation. As it is, I am certain that the PNG board is aware of the law suit, but absent a formal complaint.......
As for a boycott against PNG members, that clearly doesn't make any sense to serious numismatists.
The PNG will act on complaints. I absolutely guarantee it!! >>
Julian, that stance, makes me think the PNG doesn't really care about the issue. I wish I felt differently, and that the PNG did, as well.
<< <i>Should taking a coin that have problems and making it permanently better (taking all things into consideration) be a bad thing? >>
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the following do not constitute "permanently better." Indeed, many of these practices seem quite temporary. "Better" is subjective and it seems that many collectors and TPGs do not consider the results of these practices to be "better."
* effacing hairlines by polishing or manipulating the surfaces of proof coins * applying substances to the surface of coins to hide marks and defects * hiding marks or otherwise changing the appearance of a coin by adding toning * adding chemicals or otherwise manipulating the surfaces to create “cameo” frost on the devices of proof coins * making a coin appear more fully struck by re-engraving portions of the devices * altering dates or mintmarks or other struck portions of a coin to make it appear to be from a mint date or type other than that of origin * altering business strike coins to make them resemble proof issues are also examples of coin doctoring
However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if the doctors do feel their work is truly better, why not attach their names to their work like people do in many other fields?
<< <i>What some of these doctors are doing is tantamount to counterfeiting.
Just where the hell does PNG draw the line? >>
Cladking, the PNG knows what counterfeiting is. They'e not stupid. The trouble with this "coin doctoring" issue is, simply, sluggish thinking. When it comes to counterfeiting, we all, even the PNG, take a zero-tolerance approach to that. Nobody, here, would claim that that S added to that VDB Cent, or those tooled bell lines on that Franklin Half, or that rebuilt head on that SLQ, are "market acceptable" counterfeiting jobs. There's simply no such concept as a "market acceptable" counterfeiting job. It either is a counterfeit, or it isn't. And, there are objective means of making that determination. Virtually every other form of "coin doctoring," however, understand, and try to differentiate, is conditioned, squarely, on that very highly-ambiguous concept, "market acceptability." In fact, I'll go as far as to say, that's the whole reason that complaint, as it related, specifically, to "coin doctoring," got its ass kicked out of court. It didn't have a prayer trying to hold those defendants to that very poorly-defined concept. As such, it was, quite literally, doomed from the start.
I just can't see this as a difficult line to draw.
Of course lots of collectors hate the idea of AT, dipping, thumbing, cleaning and all the processes that have a long term detrimental effect on the hooby. But as long as collectors will pay a lot more money for an indian cent that has been thumbd and looks more nat- ural than the same coin did in its original state then there's little reason not to use such processes. Where's the harm in making a coin look like it just came out of circulation if it was done by a means that could have happened in circulation. Some people rub coins as a nervous habit. If you released such a coin to circulation it would look just like the thumbed coin in a few weeks. A harshly cleaned coin worn down to a lower grade is just a lower grade if you can no longer see the cleaning. Some coins in circulation tone very quickly because of their enviroment.
I don't believe that doctoring is a matter of degree but a matter of type. Things that can't be undone or involve moving metal and the appearance of moving metal are doctoring. A standing liberty quarter is never really going to fall into a can of putty and come out un- changed except for having a full head of just the right color. It's not going to fall into a vat of molten metal and come out with a hole filled. Adding and moving metal (other than their oxides) is where the line has to be drawn. Drilling holes to add mint marks is just as deceptive and dishonest as the ancient practice of drilling out gold coins and replacing the metal with platinum. Changing dates and adding things that were never there is count- erfeiting. Lasering hairlines is counterfeiting a coin that was never wiped.
Sure some of these practices might occur and never be caught just as drilled $20 gold pieces might circulate indefinitely but it doesn't mean drilling a hole is to add a mint mark OK for the customers of PNG just because it's done expertly and might slip between the cracks this week.
Everything is perception and perception is dependent on definitions. Just pick a definition and run with it. It doesn't mean that every coin in the market is henceforth going to be AT or dipped it just means that collectors have decided there is a line that isn't to be crossed. If we maintain the fiction that there is no line every nickel could be six steps and every SLQ full head.
Collectors worry way too much about cleaning and way too little about doctoring. If PNG is just going to bury their heads in the sand then we're going to all end up with a bunch of fake coins that hardly looked cleaned at all.
So, you buy a coin from a PNG dealer (or any dealer) and it turns out to be doctored. It could be a hideous putty/laser job or a AT coin or just a coin that didn't grade for non-obvious cleaning.
What do you do?
I think anyone here would call up the dealer. Right? The dealer should buy the coin back at the grade level he sold it for, even many years later. He sold you a raw PR-63 Proof $20 for $50,000 in 2003, and he should buy it back at the current market for a PR-63 $20 right? He sold you a AU bust half in 2008 and he should buy it as an AU today.
If you bought the coin from a PNG dealer, they have their ethics clause that they should buy it as the same grade they sold it for. I see this as protection for the collector.
If the dealer is not a PNG dealer, but still a full-time dealer, they likely still uphold the same ethics. You should always be able to sell the coin back to the source dealer at the same grade he sold it.
Unfortunately, the same does not apply to the following:
BST sellers on this forum Sellers on eBay part-time dealers at shows your buddy at the coin club meeting.
The point here is that many of you are complaining about a lack of pro-active anti-doctoring action from PNG, but you fail to see the protective ethics that PNG dealers sign when they join. If they fail to buy your coin at the same grade-level, then you can complain. From the others (who won't buy back your coin at the same grade level) that I list, I think you are sunk.
<< <i>So, you buy a coin from a PNG dealer (or any dealer) and it turns out to be doctored. It could be a hideous putty/laser job or a AT coin or just a coin that didn't grade for non-obvious cleaning.
What do you do?
I think anyone here would call up the dealer. Right? The dealer should buy the coin back at the grade level he sold it for, even many years later. He sold you a raw PR-63 Proof $20 for $50,000 in 2003, and he should buy it back at the current market for a PR-63 $20 right? He sold you a AU bust half in 2008 and he should buy it as an AU today.
If you bought the coin from a PNG dealer, they have their ethics clause that they should buy it as the same grade they sold it for. I see this as protection for the collector.
If the dealer is not a PNG dealer, but still a full-time dealer, they likely still uphold the same ethics. You should always be able to sell the coin back to the source dealer at the same grade he sold it.
Unfortunately, the same does not apply to the following:
BST sellers on this forum Sellers on eBay part-time dealers at shows your buddy at the coin club meeting.
The point here is that many of you are complaining about a lack of pro-active anti-doctoring action from PNG, but you fail to see the protective ethics that PNG dealers sign when they join. If they fail to buy your coin at the same grade-level, then you can complain. From the others (who won't buy back your coin at the same grade level) that I list, I think you are sunk. >>
There are at least a couple of problems with that...
Often, someone other than the person/dealer who doctored the coin will have sold it to the current owner. And if the coin has turned in the holder, buying it back at the same grade might fall far short of fairly compensating the owner, who paid strong money for it, based on it's former appearance.
The point I am addressing is independent of who/when/why the coin was doctored, just that a dealer sold a coin that was doctored at some point in the past.
The point is that if you are injured by a problem coin, you should be able to go back to the person who sold it to you.
So a puttied $20 graded PR-63 would not not be a PR-63 anymore, but the dealer who sold it should buy it back at the PR-63 level or face a lawsuit.
Oh, others who don't seem to be culpable for selling problem coins: auction companies - read their terms.
<< <i>The point I am addressing is independent of who/when/why the coin was doctored, just that a dealer sold a coin that was doctored at some point in the past.
The point is that if you are injured by a problem coin, you should be able to go back to the person who sold it to you. >>
So you want the grading company to absolve all buyers and sellers of risk? Since they guarantee it, once you get it past them, you are off the hook? I don't think so.
So you want the grading company to absolve all buyers and sellers of risk? Since they guarantee it, once you get it past them, you are off the hook? I don't think so.
Rick - You're so old-fashioned!
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>So you want the grading company to absolve all buyers and sellers of risk? Since they guarantee it, once you get it past them, you are off the hook? I don't think so. >>
I said nothing about letting those/the coin doctors who "get it past them" (the grading companies) off the hook - where did you come up with that? I was speaking of situations where the most recent seller of the coin was not the coin doctor.
And what if the coin came out of an auction? Do you propose that the owner contact the auction house, instead of the grading company, to make it right?
..this is getting much too complex for my blood .............
PNG dealer or no ; trying to get any dealer to buy back a coin at anywhere near what I paid for it is like trying to pull teeth .
The topic of this thread is the issue- and from it I'm extrapolating that the PNG has put their tail 'tween their legs and have quite bluntly buried their head's in the sand .
.and Mr. Feld - you had better not try to sue me because I'm ugly ..........
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances? I'd put the chances at less than 50-50. >>
I do not think that a member would be expelled for selling one doctored coin, however a pattern could certainly lead to expulsion. Also, failure to live up to an arbitration finding or agreement would be grounds for expulsion. >>
So are you saying if I want to become a coin doctor I should join the PNG, and as long as I refund the money on the few occasion I get caught, everything will be cool? This explains why the problem persists.
<< <i>Adding and moving metal (other than their oxides) is where the line has to be drawn. >>
There is a line, and, again, it's called "counterfeiting." You "move metal" on a coin, and, I don't care how good that coin looks, it doesn't get graded, much less end up in a genuine slab. Why? It's not genuine. A so-called "QT" coin can end up slabbed, however. Why? Because, it is genuine. Differentiate the two on the grounds that the latter is still "collectible," as it's still a genuine coin.
<< <i>Just pick a definition and run with it. >>
I have to be frank with you. I advise the kids in my kid's coin club that they hear words like that in relationship to "coin doctoring" and that ol' BS meter should be flashing steady by now!
I have to be frank with you. I advise the kids in my kid's coin club that they hear words like that in relationship to "coin doctoring" and that ol' BS meter should be flashing steady by now! >>
Language has no meaning at all without definition.
I am disappointed that PNG did not perform any internal investigation of the coin-doctoring allegations against their members. I wonder if PNG is more interested in protecting dealers than in protecting collectors.
But, I am just a collector. Does PNG care what collectors think of them?
Comments
The PNG has standards that are in place for the protection of the public, especially our customers.
It is not up to the PNG to define coin doctoring.
We may have some additions/corrections when coin doctoring is defined, but we are not numismatics as a whole and do not define numismatic terminology.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
<< <i>
Should taking a coin that have problems and making it permanently better (taking all things into consideration) be a bad thing? >>
That is called conservation. Doctoring is about deception. To a coin doctor, permanent is often long enough to get the coin graded, put into a holder and hopefully into the hands of a collector before the evidence of his work becomes noticeable.
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
I like your logic... a coin doctor dealer member in the PNG is like a spouse; it's cheaper to keep 'em!
Just where the hell does PNG draw the line?
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
To me the PNG now looks like it is ignoring the elephant standing in the middle of the room. I agree with Mr Eureka, the PNG is not the problem, but it is unclear whether it will be part of the solution. I think even a press release stating its position, more definitively and forcefully than it has so far on this would help. I agree, there needs to be due process and a fair approach to members that have been implicated by the PNG. Perhaps thats what should be discussed, what is the PNG process for dealing with cases like this?
<< <i>While Dave E's characterization of the PNG may be offensive to you and others, you must admit that they (PNG leaders) have brought this attitude upon themselves with their official action, or lack of action as the case may be. The question still is---part of the problem or part of the solution?
I don't see PNG as "part of the problem". As to whether or not they will be "part of the solution", the jury is still out. >>
Good point, but the PNG is still part of the proverbial loop, and if the loop is severed where the said entities exist within the folds of the flock, the problem may have an eventual end. Maybe not a final end to the problem, but at least the PNG will have a clear stand on ethics.
Note: I am not a member of the PNG, I have however read their charter and by these actions being discussed here, the group is clearly dodging an issue here.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>Of all the detractors of the PNG I ask you this. So we have 3-4-5 whatever number of members being accused of doctoring, what do you suppose we do with them. Assume you were the czar over the entire, PNG, what would you do? If they were out of the organization there is no hope of recourse because lets face it the ANA is more impotent as far as arbitration. At least as it stands now, someone could take them to arbitration and even win. Honestly it is easy to complain about them, but noone is really offering any kind of solution that would not result in the PNG facing legal action. >>
Even without the recently-dropped definition of coin doctoring, the following language is in the PNG Code Of Ethics: "7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action.
And the oft repeated response/suggestion that someone can file a complaint with the PNG, if they have been sold a doctored coin by a PNG member, sounds anything other than proactive on this issue, and like a giant cop out.
I repeat, the current PNG Code Of Ethics, as listed on their website, reads:
"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
Do the majority of PNG members really believe that such activities aren't occurring on a large scale basis? How about addressing it?
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances?
The PNG will say something stupid like:" lack of proof"
Its not all PNG members who are bad. BUT, if the organization really wants to be king, it should always be out there persuading anyone that coin doctoring is bad. It should also make everyo read and repeat its by laws about the subject and sign a form stating they read it and understood.
<< <i>
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances?
I do not think that a member would be expelled for selling one doctored coin, however a pattern could certainly lead to expulsion. Also, failure to live up to an arbitration finding or agreement would be grounds for expulsion.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
I suppose that could work, but it wouldn't stop the doctor from doctoring coins. If anything, he would ramp up the doctoring side of his business.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
From what I have read, the PNG does have plenty of evidence against the scum in the lawsuit. They are still proud members.
The PNG couldn't throw out a bag of garbage if it had too!
These threads I have been reading , the responses posted from PNG members , disgust me .
It is disgusting that the PNG should even exist . I condemn the PNG in the strongest vein allowable under the law and as my right as a citizen of the United States of America.
<< <i>From what I have read, the PNG does have plenty of evidence against the scum in the lawsuit. They are still proud members.
>>
Please tell me about the evidence.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
I will never again knowingly buy a coin from a PNG member for as long as I shall live .
Even if this means I am never to add another single solitary coin to my existing collection and find myself leaving my lifelong obsession of collecting for another venue .
That is how strongly I feel about this issue, and I have drawn my line in the sand
<< <i>Coin doctoring is an epidemic that threatens the very fabric of the hobby I so dearly love , and I am so distraught by the impotence of the PNG that I swear before God Almighty that
I will never again knowingly buy a coin from a PNG member for as long as I shall live .
Even if this means I am never to add another single solitary coin to my existing collection and find myself leaving my lifelong obsession of collecting for another venue .
That is how strongly I feel about this issue, and I have drawn my line in the sand >>
The good thing about drawing a line in the sand... either wind or water will erase that line in very short order.
<< <i>
<< <i>From what I have read, the PNG does have plenty of evidence against the scum in the lawsuit. They are still proud members.
>>
Please tell me about the evidence. >>
I believe that a number of coins submitted for grading were not returned and instead retained as evidence when the suit was filed.
PNG is more than 50 years old, and if it's members want their membership to inspire confidence in the minds of potential (and current) customers, then something CONCRETE needs to be done (vs. continued obfuscation---AKA sticking one's head in the sand).
Looking through the current membership list, I see that there are fine dealers, and well as some whom I would charitably characterize as sharks. I have been collecting coins, off and on, for decades. I left the hobby for ca. 15 years precisely because I was fed up with being ripped off by a number of dealers (one of them is a current PNG member). The continuing allure of classic coins brought me back---only now I am FAR more cynical. I routinely tell new collectors that one of the most important things to do early on is figure out who the good dealers (both fair and knowledgeable) are and stick with them. Too bad I don't feel comfortable referring newbies to the PNG dealers list.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
<< <i>So we expel them, then what? Would they not continue as usual likely losing a fraction or less of their business? The only way to motivate people like this is through their pocket books and frankly throwing them out of the PNG won't accomplish that.
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. >>
Maybe it wouldn't hurt their business, but keeping them in the same organization sure doesn't seem to help with how that org is viewed.
Imagine an organization that is commited to helping others financially. Then, they find they have an embezzler in their midst. They decide to keep the embezzler in their midst because it is better to have them close to watch over them????
I would say, it is better to have an open and honest organization of folks and not allow those that have shown their tactics to be dubious, at best.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I am thinking that the benefits to a deal being part of the PNG revolve around folks who are new to the industry, or possibly part of the "in-crowd". For the vast majority of collectors, I don't think there really is a benefit to dealing with a PNG dealer.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>... My complaint is about disclosure, more than doctoring. There should be a lifetime warranty against undisclosed doctoring, as I believe there is with counterfeits. I know dealers who personally have such warranties, but it should be part of the PNG Code of Ethics. . >>
It IS part of the PNG Code Of Ethics - as I posted earlier in this thread:
"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
<< <i>I think we as a group make a formal complaint and have as many as possible sign it.
If that does not work then . boycott ALL PNG dealers until something is done.
Unfortunately some very fine dealers may get hurt, but they leave very little recourse. >>
Well............boycott all but 2, maybe.
Of course we could argue all day about what that means, but I'm pretty sure that the PNG Board, Executive Director and legal counsel would all agree that the above clause only covers doctoring cases where metal is moved or added to the coin.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>The PNG has rules in place that concern fraud. Coin doctoring constitutes fraud. If you have been a victim of a PNG dealer that has sold you a doctored coin, please contact Robert Brueggeman, executive director, and he will get you a proper remedy. >>
That is absolutely unacceptable. Instead of banning their members from doctoring coins, or SELLING doctored coins, it's up to the buyer of
a coin to CATCH the fact that he has been sold a doctored coin, and then file a complaint. >>
If it is found that the coin had been doctored with the offender be ejected from the PNG? Or will the buyer just get their money back?
<< <i>"7. To refrain from knowingly dealing in counterfeit, altered or repaired numismatic items without fully disclosing their status to my customer."
Of course we could argue all day about what that means, but I'm pretty sure that the PNG Board, Executive Director and legal counsel would all agree that the above clause only covers doctoring cases where metal is moved or added to the coin. >>
And that one or more current PNG members have been accused of such.
Yet, to my knowledge, they have not been investigated by the PNG. And if Julian is correct, that's because no formal complaint has been brought against them. Should that really be required before the PNG takes ANY action?
<< <i>
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing.
<< <i>
<< <i>
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation. >>
What if Mark sues me for being ugly, should the PNG investigate? Anyone can be sued for anything.
If anyone was charged by a law enforcement unit, I am pretty sure that there would have been an investigation. As it is, I am certain that the PNG board is aware of the law suit, but absent a formal complaint.......
As for a boycott against PNG members, that clearly doesn't make any sense to serious numismatists.
The PNG will act on complaints. I absolutely guarantee it!!
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
One or more current PNG members have been sued for such activities.
Why does a formal charge have to be brought against him/them in order for the PNG to investigate?
What legal action would a PNG member have against the PNG, merely by virtue of being investigated for activities contrary to the PNG Code Of Ethics?
Does it have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a PNG member has violated the Code Of Ethics, before they can/will be temporarily or permanently suspended? That is the impression I get, based on lack of action. >>
Most professional organizations automatically launch an internal investigation when a member has been charged with wrongdoing. The clear evidence that PCGS presented should have resulted in the PNG suspending those dealers' memberships until if and when they were cleared of wrongdoing. >>
That's similar to what I was thinking. And it doesn't or shouldn't require an assumption that they are guilty of that of which they have been accused. For their own good and that of the PNG, there should be an investigation. >>
What if Mark sues me for being ugly, should the PNG investigate? Anyone can be sued for anything.
If anyone was charged by a law enforcement unit, I am pretty sure that there would have been an investigation. As it is, I am certain that the PNG board is aware of the law suit, but absent a formal complaint.......
As for a boycott against PNG members, that clearly doesn't make any sense to serious numismatists.
The PNG will act on complaints. I absolutely guarantee it!! >>
Julian, that stance, makes me think the PNG doesn't really care about the issue. I wish I felt differently, and that the PNG did, as well.
<< <i>Should taking a coin that have problems and making it permanently better (taking all things into consideration) be a bad thing? >>
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the following do not constitute "permanently better." Indeed, many of these practices seem quite temporary. "Better" is subjective and it seems that many collectors and TPGs do not consider the results of these practices to be "better."
* effacing hairlines by polishing or manipulating the surfaces of proof coins
* applying substances to the surface of coins to hide marks and defects
* hiding marks or otherwise changing the appearance of a coin by adding toning
* adding chemicals or otherwise manipulating the surfaces to create “cameo” frost on the devices of proof coins
* making a coin appear more fully struck by re-engraving portions of the devices
* altering dates or mintmarks or other struck portions of a coin to make it appear to be from a mint date or type other than that of origin
* altering business strike coins to make them resemble proof issues are also examples of coin doctoring
However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if the doctors do feel their work is truly better, why not attach their names to their work like people do in many other fields?
<< <i>What some of these doctors are doing is tantamount to counterfeiting.
Just where the hell does PNG draw the line? >>
This is a good question cladking. I'm interested to find out as well.
<< <i>What some of these doctors are doing is tantamount to counterfeiting.
Just where the hell does PNG draw the line? >>
Cladking, the PNG knows what counterfeiting is. They'e not stupid. The trouble with this "coin doctoring" issue is, simply, sluggish thinking. When it comes to counterfeiting, we all, even the PNG, take a zero-tolerance approach to that. Nobody, here, would claim that that S added to that VDB Cent, or those tooled bell lines on that Franklin Half, or that rebuilt head on that SLQ, are "market acceptable" counterfeiting jobs. There's simply no such concept as a "market acceptable" counterfeiting job. It either is a counterfeit, or it isn't. And, there are objective means of making that determination. Virtually every other form of "coin doctoring," however, understand, and try to differentiate, is conditioned, squarely, on that very highly-ambiguous concept, "market acceptability." In fact, I'll go as far as to say, that's the whole reason that complaint, as it related, specifically, to "coin doctoring," got its ass kicked out of court. It didn't have a prayer trying to hold those defendants to that very poorly-defined concept. As such, it was, quite literally, doomed from the start.
Of course lots of collectors hate the idea of AT, dipping, thumbing, cleaning and all the
processes that have a long term detrimental effect on the hooby. But as long as collectors
will pay a lot more money for an indian cent that has been thumbd and looks more nat-
ural than the same coin did in its original state then there's little reason not to use such
processes. Where's the harm in making a coin look like it just came out of circulation if
it was done by a means that could have happened in circulation. Some people rub coins
as a nervous habit. If you released such a coin to circulation it would look just like the
thumbed coin in a few weeks. A harshly cleaned coin worn down to a lower grade is just
a lower grade if you can no longer see the cleaning. Some coins in circulation tone very
quickly because of their enviroment.
I don't believe that doctoring is a matter of degree but a matter of type. Things that can't
be undone or involve moving metal and the appearance of moving metal are doctoring. A
standing liberty quarter is never really going to fall into a can of putty and come out un-
changed except for having a full head of just the right color. It's not going to fall into a
vat of molten metal and come out with a hole filled. Adding and moving metal (other than
their oxides) is where the line has to be drawn. Drilling holes to add mint marks is just
as deceptive and dishonest as the ancient practice of drilling out gold coins and replacing
the metal with platinum. Changing dates and adding things that were never there is count-
erfeiting. Lasering hairlines is counterfeiting a coin that was never wiped.
Sure some of these practices might occur and never be caught just as drilled $20 gold pieces
might circulate indefinitely but it doesn't mean drilling a hole is to add a mint mark OK for the
customers of PNG just because it's done expertly and might slip between the cracks this week.
Everything is perception and perception is dependent on definitions. Just pick a definition
and run with it. It doesn't mean that every coin in the market is henceforth going to be AT or
dipped it just means that collectors have decided there is a line that isn't to be crossed. If
we maintain the fiction that there is no line every nickel could be six steps and every SLQ
full head.
Collectors worry way too much about cleaning and way too little about doctoring. If PNG is
just going to bury their heads in the sand then we're going to all end up with a bunch of fake
coins that hardly looked cleaned at all.
What do you do?
I think anyone here would call up the dealer. Right? The dealer should buy the coin back at the grade level he sold it for, even many years later. He sold you a raw PR-63 Proof $20 for $50,000 in 2003, and he should buy it back at the current market for a PR-63 $20 right? He sold you a AU bust half in 2008 and he should buy it as an AU today.
If you bought the coin from a PNG dealer, they have their ethics clause that they should buy it as the same grade they sold it for. I see this as protection for the collector.
If the dealer is not a PNG dealer, but still a full-time dealer, they likely still uphold the same ethics. You should always be able to sell the coin back to the source dealer at the same grade he sold it.
Unfortunately, the same does not apply to the following:
BST sellers on this forum
Sellers on eBay
part-time dealers at shows
your buddy at the coin club meeting.
The point here is that many of you are complaining about a lack of pro-active anti-doctoring action from PNG, but you fail to see the protective ethics that PNG dealers sign when they join. If they fail to buy your coin at the same grade-level, then you can complain. From the others (who won't buy back your coin at the same grade level) that I list, I think you are sunk.
<< <i>So, you buy a coin from a PNG dealer (or any dealer) and it turns out to be doctored. It could be a hideous putty/laser job or a AT coin or just a coin that didn't grade for non-obvious cleaning.
What do you do?
I think anyone here would call up the dealer. Right? The dealer should buy the coin back at the grade level he sold it for, even many years later. He sold you a raw PR-63 Proof $20 for $50,000 in 2003, and he should buy it back at the current market for a PR-63 $20 right? He sold you a AU bust half in 2008 and he should buy it as an AU today.
If you bought the coin from a PNG dealer, they have their ethics clause that they should buy it as the same grade they sold it for. I see this as protection for the collector.
If the dealer is not a PNG dealer, but still a full-time dealer, they likely still uphold the same ethics. You should always be able to sell the coin back to the source dealer at the same grade he sold it.
Unfortunately, the same does not apply to the following:
BST sellers on this forum
Sellers on eBay
part-time dealers at shows
your buddy at the coin club meeting.
The point here is that many of you are complaining about a lack of pro-active anti-doctoring action from PNG, but you fail to see the protective ethics that PNG dealers sign when they join. If they fail to buy your coin at the same grade-level, then you can complain. From the others (who won't buy back your coin at the same grade level) that I list, I think you are sunk. >>
There are at least a couple of problems with that...
Often, someone other than the person/dealer who doctored the coin will have sold it to the current owner. And if the coin has turned in the holder, buying it back at the same grade might fall far short of fairly compensating the owner, who paid strong money for it, based on it's former appearance.
The point is that if you are injured by a problem coin, you should be able to go back to the person who sold it to you.
So a puttied $20 graded PR-63 would not not be a PR-63 anymore, but the dealer who sold it should buy it back at the PR-63 level or face a lawsuit.
Oh, others who don't seem to be culpable for selling problem coins:
auction companies - read their terms.
<< <i>The point I am addressing is independent of who/when/why the coin was doctored, just that a dealer sold a coin that was doctored at some point in the past.
The point is that if you are injured by a problem coin, you should be able to go back to the person who sold it to you. >>
Not the grading company that has a guarantee?
Rick - You're so old-fashioned!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>So you want the grading company to absolve all buyers and sellers of risk? Since they guarantee it, once you get it past them, you are off the hook? I don't think so. >>
I said nothing about letting those/the coin doctors who "get it past them" (the grading companies) off the hook - where did you come up with that? I was speaking of situations where the most recent seller of the coin was not the coin doctor.
And what if the coin came out of an auction? Do you propose that the owner contact the auction house, instead of the grading company, to make it right?
PNG dealer or no ; trying to get any dealer to buy back a coin at anywhere near what I paid for it is like trying to pull teeth .
The topic of this thread is the issue- and from it I'm extrapolating that the PNG has put their tail 'tween their legs and have quite bluntly buried their head's in the sand .
.and Mr. Feld - you had better not try to sue me because I'm ugly ..........
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So why doesn't someone, anyone, just buy a Dr'd coin from one of the PNG members named in the PCGS dr'ing suit and then file a complaint with the PNG so that they get expelled? >>
Why do you assume that the PNG dealer would be expelled under such circumstances?
I do not think that a member would be expelled for selling one doctored coin, however a pattern could certainly lead to expulsion. Also, failure to live up to an arbitration finding or agreement would be grounds for expulsion. >>
So are you saying if I want to become a coin doctor I should join the PNG, and as long as I refund the money on the few occasion I get caught, everything will be cool? This explains why the problem persists.
<< <i>Adding and moving metal (other than their oxides) is where the line has to be drawn. >>
There is a line, and, again, it's called "counterfeiting." You "move metal" on a coin, and, I don't care how good that coin looks, it doesn't get graded, much less end up in a genuine slab. Why? It's not genuine. A so-called "QT" coin can end up slabbed, however. Why? Because, it is genuine. Differentiate the two on the grounds that the latter is still "collectible," as it's still a genuine coin.
<< <i>Just pick a definition and run with it. >>
I have to be frank with you. I advise the kids in my kid's coin club that they hear words like that in relationship to "coin doctoring" and that ol' BS meter should be flashing steady by now!
<< <i>[
<< <i>Just pick a definition and run with it. >>
I have to be frank with you. I advise the kids in my kid's coin club that they hear words like that in relationship to "coin doctoring" and that ol' BS meter should be flashing steady by now! >>
Language has no meaning at all without definition.
Only law doesn't need definitions.
But, I am just a collector. Does PNG care what collectors think of them?