I did not care if PSA took five days or 55 days to grade the cards. I did not pay for the expedited service to simply get the cards graded and returned faster. I went with the minimum required service based upon the value of the cards (or so I believed based upon what I was instructed).
I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee?
I only need 18 cards to complete the Don Mattingly Master collection. Help would be great!
<< <i>I did not care if PSA took five days or 55 days to grade the cards. I did not pay for the expedited service to simply get the cards graded and returned faster. I went with the minimum required service based upon the value of the cards (or so I believed based upon what I was instructed).
I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee? >>
You are missing the point, though. The submission fee has as much, if not more, to do with the turnaround time as it does with value. The monthly special takes approximately 50 business days. Express level takes 5. The fact that you did not realize the cards were worth much less than what you thought is on you (and possibly the seller who misled you), not PSA.
As far as fees go, PSA will not accept a 52 Mantle RC under the monthly special rate, which is intended to cover cards with a value of up to $100. But I have submitted cards that after being graded were valued at 1K and have never been asked by PSA to pay more because now the card is worth more in the holder.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee? >>
Anthony mentioned that one reason ( main reason ?) for higher fees for high value cards is because of their need to stand financially behind their guarantee. That makes sense to me. I agree with Joe that if someone mistakenly sends in cards with a high value designation that they determine is incorrect, I think they should charge a lesser fee, especially if they hold up grading when they determine the card is more valuable than what was claimed in the submission. In fairness it ought to work both ways.
But, I think the OP should not have submitted the cards with out even looking at them. Once he had them he should have reviewed them and done the research ( minor effort) to be sure he knew what he had before submitting. Even honest, experienced sellers can be misinformed on more off beat issues. And as someone mentioned earlier, the graders often make mistakes in labeling cards
<< <i>The submission fee has as much, if not more, to do with the turnaround time as it does with value. . .I have submitted cards that after being graded were valued at 1K and have never been asked by PSA to pay more because now the card is worth more in the holder. >>
I agree you must pay for a faster turnaround time. HOWEVER, the book value of a card determines a MANDATORY minimum fee for grading.
Your example of sending in a card and not having PSA request a higher fee ONCE it has been graded does not fit this scenario. The fact is that the cards were mistakenly identified - based upon the book value of the mistaken cards, I was REQUIRED to pay higher fees - PSA realized the mistaken identity of the cards - PSA made no attempt to contact regarding the mistake - PSA simply graded them as the regular issues having a far lower book value - (additionally, PSA missed the quoted turnaround time for grading).
The issue does not center upon what a card might be worth AFTER being graded, as that is NOT what PSA bases the grading fees upon.
I only need 18 cards to complete the Don Mattingly Master collection. Help would be great!
But, I think the OP should not have submitted the cards with out even looking at them. Once he had them he should have reviewed them and done the research ( minor effort) to be sure he knew what he had before submitting. Even honest, experienced sellers can be misinformed on more off beat issues. And as someone mentioned earlier, the graders often make mistakes in labeling cards >>
seller does not owe the OP the grading fees. It goes both ways. If the cards came back refractor 10's , the OP would not be sending the seller a check for his windfall
PSA does not owe the OP anything. You selected a sercie level , you paid the fee, they performed the service. no way should they "verify" if you justified in picking your service level for every submission they receive. furthermore, should they not charge the fee every time someonce submits a reprint mantle at the $250 fee. the logic that psa should tell you that you should not be using the higher service after you selected it is baffling to me.
the OP received a package and didn't even open it or exam it and just transferred it into the next shipping box. are you serious? what if you received the wrong items , the items were damaged , etc , etc ,etc ............... if it was a refractor and came back in a PSA 1 holder because it was folder in 1/2, who would you blame.
you can't talk on the phone , you don't have 5 minutes ever. I have heard this before , it is usually said by someone who thinks he is in the wrong and doesn't want to talk live because he will have no other option than to agree that he was wrong
as for higher grading fees, I have had PSA buy back an $8K card among others. you need a lot of $5 subs to make up for an $8K mistake , not as many $250 subs to make up for the same mistake. If they are going to be potentially liable for $8K, they should charge more to cover any potential mistake. not sure how this doesn't make sense
I feel bad for the OP but seems like he made multiple rookie mistakes and proceeded down a path that was not very logically thought through. chalk it up to a learning experience, move on, and do a better job next time
<< <i>seller does not owe the OP the grading fees. It goes both ways. If the cards came back refractor 10's , the OP would not be sending the seller a check for his windfall
PSA does not owe the OP anything. You selected a sercie level , you paid the fee, they performed the service. no way should they "verify" if you justified in picking your service level for every submission they receive. furthermore, should they not charge the fee every time someonce submits a reprint mantle at the $250 fee. the logic that psa should tell you that you should not be using the higher service after you selected it is baffling to me.
the OP received a package and didn't even open it or exam it and just transferred it into the next shipping box. are you serious? what if you received the wrong items , the items were damaged , etc , etc ,etc ............... if it was a refractor and came back in a PSA 1 holder because it was folder in 1/2, who would you blame.
you can't talk on the phone , you don't have 5 minutes ever. I have heard this before , it is usually said by someone who thinks he is in the wrong and doesn't want to talk live because he will have no other option than to agree that he was wrong
as for higher grading fees, I have had PSA buy back an $8K card among others. you need a lot of $5 subs to make up for an $8K mistake , not as many $250 subs to make up for the same mistake. If they are going to be potentially liable for $8K, they should charge more to cover any potential mistake. not sure how this doesn't make sense
I feel bad for the OP but seems like he made multiple rookie mistakes and proceeded down a path that was not very logically thought through. chalk it up to a learning experience, move on, and do a better job next time >>
_______________
I was going to let this response go, but there are too many inaccurate statements to do so. Here goes:
1. If the cards had come back graded Refractor PSA 10, then that would have been a completely different scenario. The one posed is that a seller insisted the cards were Refractors, I paid the required fee for such cards, and they were returned in graded form as the actual regular issues. The issue I experienced has nothing to do with the grade of the cards received, rather incorrect information (checked with seller BEFORE bidding, winning, and paying - due diligence in attempting to gather information regarding cards I have never seen before) from a seller leading to lost fees from PSA.
2. I did not "select" a service from PSA. I was required to "select" the service based upon the book value of the cards. In retrospect, PSA should have actually contacted me once they observed a discrepancy with my order. The completed and signed form had the three cards clearly marked as the Refractor versions, which is why I was required to pay the higher fee. When PSA determined they were not the Refractors, I should have been contacted. If I were a different person, I could have claimed PSA switched my cards from the "Refractors" to the "regular" issues. They would not have proof otherwise, as my paperwork indicated I sent them three Refractors and paid to have the three Refractors graded.
3. I did open the package from the seller and it was packaged the same as the hundreds of previous ones over the last eight years. Thus, I was able to see the top and bottom card and "safely" assumed the third card was correctly nestled in the middle, as always. I simply did not remove the packaging and repackage before sending to PSA. Had I removed the packaging from the cards, I would not have been able to tell the difference. Again, I have never seen the 1993 Finest Promo Refractors in person. As other collectors have noted, all the Finest Refractors are not as obvious to see as others. Again, I accepted the confirmation from a seller (of whom I had hundreds of experiences over an eight year period and who has hundreds of thousands of positive feedback ratings) that the cards were as stated.
3a. Again, the condition of the cards is not the issue. I have not once mentioned the grades received on the cards. If one had been bent or otherwise damaged, it would not have mattered. I simply wanted to have the three Refractors graded. Obviously, PSA 10 grades would have been outstanding. However, that was not the end goal.
4. I never stated I can never talk on the phone. As I have explained to the seller, I leave for work at 6:00 a.m. and return home from work (generally) around 10:00 p.m. most days. In between trying to eat and sleep, I do have a family consisting of two very young children. While at work, we are not permitted to use the phones for personal business (the monthly call logs are tracked). Thus, the vast majority of my communications with others is done via e-mail. This is the reason why I wanted a simple answer from the seller in response to my offer to compromise. At the same time, I have called the seller eight different times. I have left messages and not received replies. Otherwise, I was informed the seller was on vacation (apparently, the card business is highly lucrative, as the seller is able to be on vacation quite often) and never received any type of follow up to the issue. I cannot and will not simply continue to call when an answer, either yes or no will suffice, via e-mail will accomplish the intended task.
5. I have learned that regardless of the amount of time working with a seller, one may not always be able to fully trust said seller. In this case, the seller simply refunded the purchase price (this was actually automated through eBay), did not refund the original shipping or the return shipping, and received graded cards returned (free PSA grading fees) to turn around and profit from selling.
I only need 18 cards to complete the Don Mattingly Master collection. Help would be great!
If nothing else, at this point, I would take this situation as a learning experience and a reminder to practice due diligence when submitting potentially valuable cards, so that such a scenario does not unfold again. Consider this ordeal as part of your tuition for the learning experience. Good luck..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Thank you to all the members who posted helpful advice/opinions regarding this situation. I fully agree this has been a learning experience, although a costly one. However, I plan to not experience this situation again. Hopefully, other members who have followed this thread will learn from my mistake/misfortune.
Although it will not have much of an impact on the seller, I will no longer be able to feel secure in any future dealings. After eight years and hundreds of purchases (thousands of dollars my wife definitely would liked to have seen spent in other areas), I will leave this experience as the end to our dealings. I know many of you will continue to deal with this seller and I hope all continues to work out well with your transactions. I fully understand the seller is not obligated to work towards making things right, but it would have been the professional/correct path to choose. Again, I have never experienced any negative interactions with this seller until this instance. However, it is too large of a financial loss to simply overlook.
Thank you again and I hope all future postings are of a positive nature.
Good luck with your collections!
I only need 18 cards to complete the Don Mattingly Master collection. Help would be great!
Comments
I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee?
<< <i>I did not care if PSA took five days or 55 days to grade the cards. I did not pay for the expedited service to simply get the cards graded and returned faster. I went with the minimum required service based upon the value of the cards (or so I believed based upon what I was instructed).
I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee? >>
You are missing the point, though. The submission fee has as much, if not more, to do with the turnaround time as it does with value. The monthly special takes approximately 50 business days. Express level takes 5. The fact that you did not realize the cards were worth much less than what you thought is on you (and possibly the seller who misled you), not PSA.
As far as fees go, PSA will not accept a 52 Mantle RC under the monthly special rate, which is intended to cover cards with a value of up to $100. But I have submitted cards that after being graded were valued at 1K and have never been asked by PSA to pay more because now the card is worth more in the holder.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I have been contacted by PSA in the past when I sent a card in for grading and it was supposed to be at a higher fee level. PSA halted the grading process until they contacted me and received, in writing, confirmation that I wanted to proceed with the grading (and had received the additional funds). Do they only contact when they stand to lose money on the grading? Would not the right thing be for them to have a standard policy to contact in both types of cases? If they can take the time to contact when they want more money for a mistake, then should they not also contact when the mistake would mean a lower fee? >>
+1
Sorry for that mess, Chris.
But, I think the OP should not have submitted the cards with out even looking at them. Once he had them he should have reviewed them and done the research ( minor effort) to be sure he knew what he had before submitting. Even honest, experienced sellers can be misinformed on more off beat issues. And as someone mentioned earlier, the graders often make mistakes in labeling cards
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
<< <i>The submission fee has as much, if not more, to do with the turnaround time as it does with value. . .I have submitted cards that after being graded were valued at 1K and have never been asked by PSA to pay more because now the card is worth more in the holder. >>
I agree you must pay for a faster turnaround time. HOWEVER, the book value of a card determines a MANDATORY minimum fee for grading.
Your example of sending in a card and not having PSA request a higher fee ONCE it has been graded does not fit this scenario. The fact is that the cards were mistakenly identified - based upon the book value of the mistaken cards, I was REQUIRED to pay higher fees - PSA realized the mistaken identity of the cards - PSA made no attempt to contact regarding the mistake - PSA simply graded them as the regular issues having a far lower book value - (additionally, PSA missed the quoted turnaround time for grading).
The issue does not center upon what a card might be worth AFTER being graded, as that is NOT what PSA bases the grading fees upon.
+1
seller does not owe the OP the grading fees. It goes both ways. If the cards came back refractor 10's , the OP would not be sending the seller a check for his windfall
PSA does not owe the OP anything. You selected a sercie level , you paid the fee, they performed the service. no way should they "verify" if you justified in picking your service level for every submission they receive. furthermore, should they not charge the fee every time someonce submits a reprint mantle at the $250 fee. the logic that psa should tell you that you should not be using the higher service after you selected it is baffling to me.
the OP received a package and didn't even open it or exam it and just transferred it into the next shipping box. are you serious? what if you received the wrong items , the items were damaged , etc , etc ,etc ............... if it was a refractor and came back in a PSA 1 holder because it was folder in 1/2, who would you blame.
you can't talk on the phone , you don't have 5 minutes ever. I have heard this before , it is usually said by someone who thinks he is in the wrong and doesn't want to talk live because he will have no other option than to agree that he was wrong
as for higher grading fees, I have had PSA buy back an $8K card among others. you need a lot of $5 subs to make up for an $8K mistake , not as many $250 subs to make up for the same mistake. If they are going to be potentially liable for $8K, they should charge more to cover any potential mistake. not sure how this doesn't make sense
I feel bad for the OP but seems like he made multiple rookie mistakes and proceeded down a path that was not very logically thought through. chalk it up to a learning experience, move on, and do a better job next time
<< <i>seller does not owe the OP the grading fees. It goes both ways. If the cards came back refractor 10's , the OP would not be sending the seller a check for his windfall
PSA does not owe the OP anything. You selected a sercie level , you paid the fee, they performed the service. no way should they "verify" if you justified in picking your service level for every submission they receive. furthermore, should they not charge the fee every time someonce submits a reprint mantle at the $250 fee. the logic that psa should tell you that you should not be using the higher service after you selected it is baffling to me.
the OP received a package and didn't even open it or exam it and just transferred it into the next shipping box. are you serious? what if you received the wrong items , the items were damaged , etc , etc ,etc ............... if it was a refractor and came back in a PSA 1 holder because it was folder in 1/2, who would you blame.
you can't talk on the phone , you don't have 5 minutes ever. I have heard this before , it is usually said by someone who thinks he is in the wrong and doesn't want to talk live because he will have no other option than to agree that he was wrong
as for higher grading fees, I have had PSA buy back an $8K card among others. you need a lot of $5 subs to make up for an $8K mistake , not as many $250 subs to make up for the same mistake. If they are going to be potentially liable for $8K, they should charge more to cover any potential mistake. not sure how this doesn't make sense
I feel bad for the OP but seems like he made multiple rookie mistakes and proceeded down a path that was not very logically thought through. chalk it up to a learning experience, move on, and do a better job next time >>
_______________
I was going to let this response go, but there are too many inaccurate statements to do so. Here goes:
1. If the cards had come back graded Refractor PSA 10, then that would have been a completely different scenario. The one posed is that a seller insisted the cards were Refractors, I paid the required fee for such cards, and they were returned in graded form as the actual regular issues. The issue I experienced has nothing to do with the grade of the cards received, rather incorrect information (checked with seller BEFORE bidding, winning, and paying - due diligence in attempting to gather information regarding cards I have never seen before) from a seller leading to lost fees from PSA.
2. I did not "select" a service from PSA. I was required to "select" the service based upon the book value of the cards. In retrospect, PSA should have actually contacted me once they observed a discrepancy with my order. The completed and signed form had the three cards clearly marked as the Refractor versions, which is why I was required to pay the higher fee. When PSA determined they were not the Refractors, I should have been contacted. If I were a different person, I could have claimed PSA switched my cards from the "Refractors" to the "regular" issues. They would not have proof otherwise, as my paperwork indicated I sent them three Refractors and paid to have the three Refractors graded.
3. I did open the package from the seller and it was packaged the same as the hundreds of previous ones over the last eight years. Thus, I was able to see the top and bottom card and "safely" assumed the third card was correctly nestled in the middle, as always. I simply did not remove the packaging and repackage before sending to PSA. Had I removed the packaging from the cards, I would not have been able to tell the difference. Again, I have never seen the 1993 Finest Promo Refractors in person. As other collectors have noted, all the Finest Refractors are not as obvious to see as others. Again, I accepted the confirmation from a seller (of whom I had hundreds of experiences over an eight year period and who has hundreds of thousands of positive feedback ratings) that the cards were as stated.
3a. Again, the condition of the cards is not the issue. I have not once mentioned the grades received on the cards. If one had been bent or otherwise damaged, it would not have mattered. I simply wanted to have the three Refractors graded. Obviously, PSA 10 grades would have been outstanding. However, that was not the end goal.
4. I never stated I can never talk on the phone. As I have explained to the seller, I leave for work at 6:00 a.m. and return home from work (generally) around 10:00 p.m. most days. In between trying to eat and sleep, I do have a family consisting of two very young children. While at work, we are not permitted to use the phones for personal business (the monthly call logs are tracked). Thus, the vast majority of my communications with others is done via e-mail. This is the reason why I wanted a simple answer from the seller in response to my offer to compromise. At the same time, I have called the seller eight different times. I have left messages and not received replies. Otherwise, I was informed the seller was on vacation (apparently, the card business is highly lucrative, as the seller is able to be on vacation quite often) and never received any type of follow up to the issue. I cannot and will not simply continue to call when an answer, either yes or no will suffice, via e-mail will accomplish the intended task.
5. I have learned that regardless of the amount of time working with a seller, one may not always be able to fully trust said seller. In this case, the seller simply refunded the purchase price (this was actually automated through eBay), did not refund the original shipping or the return shipping, and received graded cards returned (free PSA grading fees) to turn around and profit from selling.
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
<< <i>You win. You were screwed. Move on. >>
+1
Duncan is also spot on.
If nothing else, at this point, I would take this situation as a learning experience and a reminder to practice due diligence when submitting potentially valuable cards, so that such a scenario does not unfold again. Consider this ordeal as part of your tuition for the learning experience. Good luck..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
_______________
Thank you to all the members who posted helpful advice/opinions regarding this situation. I fully agree this has been a learning experience, although a costly one. However, I plan to not experience this situation again. Hopefully, other members who have followed this thread will learn from my mistake/misfortune.
Although it will not have much of an impact on the seller, I will no longer be able to feel secure in any future dealings. After eight years and hundreds of purchases (thousands of dollars my wife definitely would liked to have seen spent in other areas), I will leave this experience as the end to our dealings. I know many of you will continue to deal with this seller and I hope all continues to work out well with your transactions. I fully understand the seller is not obligated to work towards making things right, but it would have been the professional/correct path to choose. Again, I have never experienced any negative interactions with this seller until this instance. However, it is too large of a financial loss to simply overlook.
Thank you again and I hope all future postings are of a positive nature.
Good luck with your collections!