<< <i>The class members will have the option of either sending in their rounds, and having the defendants replace them with rounds that are marked copy, or they have the option of returning the rounds and receiving a refund based on the closing spot price on the day it is received by the settlement agent. >>
Also, this needs to change. They should refund the purchase price. This would be the case in any other counterfeiting settlement.
Finally, as of December of last year, the Hobby Protection Act has been amended in a way that closes the "we didn't make them or import them, we just sell them" loophole.
I agree. But I do commend any man for standing his ground and up for his principles. The idea and action is commendable. It's a pity that the "act" perpetrated on some innocent victims lead us into court to even discuss the legalities and formalities that seem so unsettled, every single time a new case is opened.
So on that note, and in closing my thoughts on it all… Kudos to the OP for his valiant effort.
<< <i>This case represents everything wrong in this country. As sad day indeed. >>
We may have been separated at birth
Mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>It sounds to me like the only winner in this case was the lawyers. >>
When no one is actually harmed and it's a nuisance case that is the likely outcome.
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Wouldn't it be ironic if these copy ASE proof rounds end up being more valuable than the real thing? >>
With frivolous law suits there are often unintended consequences. I was thinking along your lines earlier.
M
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
I sure these same beginning collectors would pay a million dollars for a MS67 1881-S Morgan since it looks like a 1893-S. This was only a win for the lawyers, no one else.
I suppose it was a win for baseball when some lawyer won a suit against Louisville Slugger for one of their bats being used in a baseball game.
Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
I agree. People who are always arguing for letting stuff go with rip-offs and dishonesty are being the devil's advocates. When you keep letting fraud go, shrugging your shoulders not taking legal action you end up hating yourself; the anger has to be directed to the cause of the fraud and let the wheels of justice work, though there are usually lots of people around telling you like an ANA governor once told me that the god of numismatics will bless you if you ignore the fraud and move on.
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
There was no ruling in the case. So it has NOT been established that the "Westminster Mint" broke any laws here. (Presumed "innocent" until "convicted" and all that). I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread. But I would be careful when claiming that a company had broken the law.
<< <i>Has anyone looked up some of the history on this private mint and their associated business and dealings if not you should, it is interesting. >>
It looks like there have been some complaints filed against them and reported on Ripoff Report. Mostly complaints about slow shipping times. I saw one other report of them billing for and shipping unwanted/unsolicited items, but that may have been about a similarly-named UK company. They appear to be a BBB accredited business.
<< <i>But I would be careful when claiming that a company had broken the law. >>
Probably good advice.
I'm thinking an awful lot of readers here are under the mistaken impression that the minters were charged with a crime.
That certainly never happened regarding those rounds and they have broken no laws as far as I'm aware. They haven't even been shown to have violated the HPA, for that matter.
Also, because there was no injunction issued, what's to stop them from making more? Did they agree to that in the settlement?
Even if they did so, and choose to abide by the agreement, there is absolutely nothing that came of this civil suit that can prevent anyone else from making the same rounds. >>
An injunction was part of the settlement as they have agreed not to produce the items anymore. Do people understand that the defendants in this case took the easy way out? By settling they are not subject to the courts ruling and it is very easy to see that by settling they are stating they were wrong of the actions being claimed. If the did not believe this then why did they not fully prosecute this action instead of folding up and laying down like they did?
Steve it is a win for the hobby it is not a win for minters and dealers. You sir are very correct in saying "I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby?"
I also commend the OP for standing up for our hobby and wish more people would. This legal action will cause many private minters to think about what they make as many items from private mints could be confused by those who are not educated the way people on this board are and really how many people in the world are.
If you were not a coin collector and just going about your business on any given day or a child and this coin was in your pocket change, face up, would you even think twice about it? (answer the question truthfully and I know that will be hard for some not because they are liers but because of basic attitudes)
Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
Class Counsel Fees and Expenses ... not to exceed $110,000
Incentive award ... the $1,000 payment that the Defendants have agreed to pay to the named-Plaintiff
Defendants "agree that all Silver Rounds of the type described herein and manufactured by them in the future will be stamped "COPY""
(emphasis added) so... no OTHER silver round design is included, if they sell the dies to somebody else and purchase the same rounds w/o copy for resale it's not covered...
Section VIII (release) "By this Settlement Agreement and the following Release, Defendants and ... are released from any and all claims or causes of action ... arising out of or related to .... alleged violation of the Federal Hobby Protection Act."
In other words, stop claiming they agreed that they violated the HPA. They said no such thing.
XI MISCELANEOUS PROVISIONS
"A. This Settlement Agreement, and the exhibits and related document hereto, are not to be used in evidence and shall not at any time be construed or deemed to be any admission or concession by Defendants with respect to any alleged wrongdoing, fault or omission of any kind whatsoever, regardless of whether or not this Settlement Agreement results in entry of a Final Approval Order as contemplated herein. Defendants specifically deny all of the allegations and in connection with the Litigation or Action. This provision shall survive the expiration of voiding of the Settlement Agreement."
Oh, and don't think you can sue your lawyers for selling you out...
"H. ... Each of the Parties was represented by competent and effective counsel throughout the course of settlement negotiations and in the drafting and execution of this Settlement Agreement, ..."
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Because they admitted no guilt. The settlement is basically you can sell back your rounds for spot (a little better than what you get at the LCS), or they'll punch "COPY" into them and return them and they eat postage both ways. And they have to stamp "COPY" on the ones on-hand, but they can continue to sell them.
Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i> D Carr said ...I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread. >>
How about the other defendants in the case, have you had any dealings with Ian Clay, Michael Kott, or the Highland Mint?
<< <i>Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction. >>
It seems many people do not understand why a defendant settles a case without going to trial. My family is currently involved in a large medical civil suit. The companies involved (the defendants) are doing everything they can to settle every case. By settling they do not have to legally admit guilt on the record.
By not having a case in which the defendants have to admit guilt on the record they protect their company from further proceedings and protect their reputation. This becomes very important when a corporation is being audited to figure out liability insurance. It is also important to future estimates as to the companies profitability should they seek financing for any future endeavors.
How many people on a daily basis in the United States go into court civilly and criminally and say " not guilty ", I have very rarely seen anyone in court accused of an action admit that action in the first court date. Think about it.
If the defendants in this case were secure in their possition they would have had no reason to settle. In stead the defendants offered settlement. Should they have prevailed they would have received costs and even possible damages, they would also have a legal decision on the record of law of which they could point to. They do not have this as they determined it was in their best interest to settle.
Anyone can say they did not admit guilt and that is true but they also did not admit that they are not guilty. They don't have to do either with a settlement. Concern from the defendants should be apparent, for those who can not see the fact of this, I for one am at a loss.
Well done! Part of me is happy that you stopped them and that they agreed to settle; the other part of me wishes that it had gone to trial and through the appeals process so that it would generate precedent that could be used in other cases.
<< <i>Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction. >>
Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO.
<< <i>Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO. >>
And that is PRECISELY the point. THERE IS NO PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED HERE. Nothing. None. There is no admission of guilt. Go read the terms of the settlement - I posted an extract above. Anybody can sign up for a PACER account and read the same document... unless your charges exceed a minimum amount they even waive them each quarter.
All they did, all the record will show, is that they paid off a nuisance law suit.
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i>Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO. >>
And that is PRECISELY the point. THERE IS NO PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED HERE. Nothing. None. There is no admission of guilt. Go read the terms of the settlement - I posted an extract above. Anybody can sign up for a PACER account and read the same document... unless your charges exceed a minimum amount they even waive them each quarter.
All they did, all the record will show, is that they paid off a nuisance law suit. >>
And a $1000 to the lead plaintiff but yes that's the gist of it.
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>The only ones to make out in this are the attorneys, the people who bought won't send the coins back in to get replacements. >>
I would send mine in after reading the settlement. Also the attorneys got paid to do a job, no one here knows how much work they put in as they took the case on contingency the attorneys were responsible for all cost from filling, all investigations, paying any personnel who worked on the case and any outside personnel. This is just like a dealer paying for their overhead through the profits of the coins they sell. Would you honestly begrudge someone getting paid for completed work?
As to no president being shown here that is not really accurate. Any person who reads the posts about this legal action and the case file will see that the defendants folded. This could inspire others that have concerns about numismatic items in our hobby to step up and do something about it. This shows all those that just sit back and say nothing can be done, corporations are too big to take on and one person can not make a change are wrong. One man did make a change for our hobby, by acting on something that he felt needed to be addressed a questionable item to some will be made to comply with the HPA.
Than you Tom for standing up for our hobby as a starting point always needs to be determined.
Wow. A lot of "Monday Morning Armchair Quarterbacking" going on.
All of the sides here have made relevant points, and I'll attempt to avoid playing semantics. As to the assertion "Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction", I disagree wholeheartedly when viewed under the light that American manufacturers spent hundreds of millions in R&D of technology to develop the CD, the player, high resolution TVs, etcetera back in the '80s. The Chinese reverse-engineered this technology and sold it back to us for pennies on the dollar, effectively destroying companies who could never recover their ROI. They sued, they WON, and they did get injunctions against the Chinese (state-owned) companies that stole their licensed and patented wares. What did it get them?? NOTHING. It's been going on ever since, the Chinese are simply expanding into the realm of TPG copying with their expertise in stealing tradecraft. They are masters of the art, and they know there are no punitive measures coming from our Attorney General's office.
As to the plaintiffs and why they did not see this through court; same reason everyone with an airtight case folds and settles in the end...there is absolutely no guarantee how the court will rule. You can have the facts on your side, you can have history on your side, you can have a better team of lawyers on your side. But in the end, one weighs the risk vs. reward and chooses. I worked for an employer who garnered a reputation for being an "easy mark" in my trade because of their history of settling frivolous suits (NOT saying this case was frivolous). It was incredibly frustrating. But a good client listens to their attorney.
Very few people have bottomless pockets. The smart ones retain their deep pockets because they are smart enough not to fight a battle to "winner take all" end unless they know the outcome. Unless you've sat in court, listened to a judge admonish both parties to come to a settlement or he/she would be extremely unhappy, it is easy to say "I'd fight it to the end!!". It is another thing to walk back into court and tell that same judge you have decided to tie up their court with a trial.
JMHO...seasoned with some experience in seven-figure settlements that I desperately wanted to fight on principle. But it was not my money.
<< <i> D Carr said ...I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread. >>
How about the other defendants in the case, have you had any dealings with Ian Clay, Michael Kott, or the Highland Mint? >>
Not that I know of. Should I know them ? What did they do (if anything) ?
Here is the problem that I have with the outcome, illustrated by this HYPOTHETICAL scenario:
Suppose I like the "Walking Liberty" design. I want some cheap silver bullion rounds but I don't want the added markup of Silver Eagles. I DON'T want "COPY" on my silver. That will make them harder to sell. What if years from now one of my heirs goes to liquidate the rounds but they notice "COPY" on them. What does that mean ? Does that mean they are copies of silver rounds ? Does that mean they aren't real silver ? What if my heir disposes of them in the recycle bin because they didn't realize the rounds really were actual silver ?
I'm not ever going to buy silver rounds with "COPY" on them because when I go to sell them potential buyers might then think they are made of imitation (copy) silver.
The end result here is that one of my choices has been taken away. I'm not allowed to purchase the rounds from the producer in the form I prefer.
[End of hypothetical scenario].
Obviously, you were bothered by these rounds being sold. I'm just wondering, when deciding to file this lawsuit, did you consider that fact that some people might be disappointed at losing this product choice ?
<< <i>Yes, it's the final piece of the puzzle too, seemingly revealing the actual intention behind the suit. >>
It's only now, when the man behind the curtain is revealed, that we question the Wizard's motives... I will credit the OP with more personal integrity than that.
Although much like Don Quixote should have known there were things about Rocinante that made him not the ideal choice, neither OP nor the rest of us asked questions about the lawyers involved... until now. Lesson learned: We all should have looked closer at the definition of 'win' from a law firm whose tag line is "We take cases other law firms have turned down. And we win." Had we looked, we might have been able to counsel OP that when he signed up with them he lost any control over the purpose of the litigation. Sadly, once you signed up with these attorneys, just because they let you sit in the right front seat and choose the tunes on the radio, didn't mean you were driving the bus.
Let's look at Settlement Chasers, LLP - emphasis added to quotations from their home page, http://www.denittislaw.com/
<< <i>Attorneys at the firm: Prepare every case as if it is going to trial >>
As if is a little odd - shouldn't winning a class action involve going to court and proving your allegations. Guess not... their history and bombast - http://www.denittislaw.com/verdicts-and-settlements/ - shows settlement after settlement - and a history of overstating the impact of their settlements... especially this one:
<< <i>Consumer Fraud Class Actions
$9,000,000 – DeMarco v. National Collector’s Mint, 229 F.R.D. 73 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
The settlement, on behalf of a class of 176,000 people, provided a full refund (equaling almost $9,000,000) to people who bought the Freedom Tower Silver Dollar from National Collector’s Mint, Inc. (NCM) between September 1, 2004 and May 31, 2005. The class complaint alleged that NCM misrepresented the authenticity of the Freedom Tower Silver Dollars it sold to consumers. The class also claimed that NCM violated the Hobby Protection Act 15 U.S.C. § 2101(b) and should have marked the Freedom Tower Silver Dollars they sold with the word “COPY”. The case was a matter of first impression in the United Stated District Court for Southern District of New York, and is now a published opinion in the Federal Reporters. September 2005. >>
Dissect that...
The class complaint allegedand claimed - you can allege or claim darn near ANYTHING in a complaint.
and
is now a published opinion. Truth? Yes, there is an opinion - anyone can Google for DeMARCO v. NATIONAL COLLECTOR'S MINT, 229 F.R.D. 73 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
but what was decided was NOT a violation of the HPA or a precedent in any stretch of the imagination:
<< <i>Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons the Defendants' motion to dismiss per Rule 12(b)(6) is DENIED, the Defendants' motion to dismiss per Rule 8 is DENIED, and the Plaintiff's motion to certify the class per Rule 23 (b)(2) is GRANTED.
This constitutes the decision and order of the Court. >>
So the attorneys were successful in getting the class certified whereupon NCM settled. That's not a precedent about the HPA or anything. It's just a step in a process... the requirements to get a class certified are much higher than to merely file a case, but they in no way settle anything as fact or precedent.
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
The relief available through legal suits filed under the HPA/CCPA is clearly stated in the text of the Act (link above.)
*If* a plaintiff prevails, they can obtain an injunction halting the production/distribution of the replicas unless stamped COPY.
The successful plaintiff can also recover legal fees.
But that is all the court can give them. That's the extent of it. Go read it and see.
The 'named plaintiff' is going to get $1,000 *only* because they agreed to drop the suit in exchange for the settlement agreement. If they hadn't agreed to drop the suit in exchange for the cash and the virtually worthless agreement to start using a COPY punch, there was no way anybody got any cash *except* the lawyers.
And the lawyers would get nothing if they did not win. There was virtually no real chance they could have won.
The only possibility of establishing the threshold for "imitation numismatic items" that they claimed they wanted to establish, was by the precedent that would come from an actual ruling by the court.
The only way to guarantee $$ for the originator of the suit and the lawyers, was to settle. They chose the money instead of the precedent they claimed they wanted to establish. Whether money was the goal all along, only the originator of the suit knows with certainty.
It's all very simple, and it's all 'in black and white'.
It's quite stunning to see some people still clinging to the idea that this suit was filed to "help the hobby". It's unbelievable that they somehow have convinced themselves that it did, despite the outcome.
They say you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink. You can also lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. >>
Seriously you think the OP went through all the work that this required for $1000.00? You have stated you know what it takes to prosecute a suit and are begrudging $1000.00, seems like you are really reaching. How about you actually talk to the OP and see what his intentions were and are instead of publicly discounting his motives witout any evidence.
A man who refuses to open his eyes can not see what is in front of them.
For those that really want to see class action suits in action and all the settlements look up Bard Medical. This will show you why so many suits settle.
In the early 1900's congress passed a law called the "Federal Arbitration Act." This law which was intended to apply only to merchants engaged in interstate commerce at the time it was passed, is now in the 1990's being used as a weapon against consumers. Arbitration was intended to be a process whereby equally sophisticated businessmen could negotiate an agreement with each other to submit any dispute they might have to an independent third party for resolution instead of a court. The theory was that as to businessmen, the law should permit an alternative method for them to quickly resolve their differences outside of court. The fact is that most businesses engaged in such transactions have lawyers on retainer or on staff to negotiate such agreements, they fully understand the ramifications of arbitration, and the terms of the arbitration are agreed to by parties of equal bargaining strength.
Corporations are now using the same law to abuse the American consumer. Contracts with arbitration clauses involving credit, banking, insurance, and even home construction projects are now appearing with increasing frequency. An arbitration clause is particularly insidious when included in contracts of adhesion, i.e., contracts between businesses and consumers offered solely on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. Why are such arbitration clauses bad for consumers?classactionlitigation.com/faq
The relief available through legal suits filed under the HPA/CCPA is clearly stated in the text of the Act (link above.)
*If* a plaintiff prevails, they can obtain an injunction halting the production/distribution of the replicas unless stamped COPY.
The successful plaintiff can also recover legal fees.
But that is all the court can give them. That's the extent of it. Go read it and see. >>
This is just not factually correct, I went to your link as you suggest, and it says that not only can they get injunctive relief, but you can also get damages. I added the bolding
SEC. 3. (a) In General.–If any person violates section 2 (a) or (b) or a rule under section 2 (c), any interested person may commence a civil action for injunctive relief restraining such violation, and for damages, in any United States District Court for a district in which the defendant resides,
I look forward to answering all of your questions, and dcarr's questions when the suit is fully resolved and the settlement is approved by the court. Until then I think it is prudent for me to just stick to the facts. It is rather difficult to restrain myself when people seem to be going after me personally, but I understood that was a possibility when I started this thread.
It's all very simple, and it's all 'in black and white'.
It's quite stunning to see some people still clinging to the idea that this suit was filed to "help the hobby". It's unbelievable that they somehow have convinced themselves that it did, despite the outcome.
They say you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink. You can also lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. >>
While some have their heart in the right place I can't help but feel many have their heads up their_ _ _. ...............They want to believe.
Whatever. The plaintiff wasn't never hurt and frankly no one else was either. IMO this was a calculated lawsuit that was frivolous and the outcome set less then zero effective precedence. If anything it gives more leeway to private minters that are actually unscrupulous. They now have floor on their downside in which to operate.
This was no win for the hobby nor did I ever think that was ever the intent. JMHO. A $1000 to the lead plaintiff and lawyers got paid. Thats what happened.
A private minter was targeted and for what atrocities ? Selling a one ounce round of silver that actually contained an ounce of silver in it. This whole escapade actually makes collectors out to be idiots that need to be saved from themselves. This whole thing gives me a bad taste in my mouth. I'm done with thread thread. It creeps me out.
Mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Now I'm wondering where this is going to go. Now that your lawyers have beaten some little small time company into submission so that they have had to cut their losses and move on, are you going after the big guys now?
MCM - Modern Coin Mart or APMEX - American Precious Metals Exchange or one of the other big bullion dealers?
They all sell similar items, you know. They have "copies" of buffalo nickels, mercury dimes, peace and morgan dollars, etc, and none have "copy" on them. And they are much better quality than the small time minters. So much so that MCM has the following disclaimer on their "peace dollar" silver rounds:
*This item is a .999 Fine Silver Round - Not an actual Peace Dollar
Sounds like it is pretty close to the coin. It doesn't matter, most people will be able to tell the difference and some people you just can't save from themselves.
And I don't care. I like both MCM and APMEX, I don't think they, or the dealer you went after, are doing anything wrong and I do business with MCM and APMEX regularly and will continue to do so. In fact, while I was looking at their inventories just now, I found one of their silver bullion coin-type items that I like and I am going to purchase it.
Well, congratulations again and good luck with whatever you decide to do.
Comments
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
Honor is what you do when no one is looking
Menomonee Falls Wisconsin USA
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistr...dset.aspx?s=68269&ac=1">Musky 1861 Mint Set
This is a win for the hobby, and a blow against counterfeiters. :-)
Good job!
I personally would have preferred seeing it go through the courts, but any counterfeiter stopped is one less to worry about.
The Black Cabinet
A database of counterfeit coinage.
http://www.theblackcabinet.org
<< <i>The class members will have the option of either sending in their rounds, and having the defendants replace them with rounds that are marked copy, or they have the option of returning the rounds and receiving a refund based on the closing spot price on the day it is received by the settlement agent. >>
Also, this needs to change. They should refund the purchase price. This would be the case in any other counterfeiting settlement.
The Black Cabinet
A database of counterfeit coinage.
http://www.theblackcabinet.org
See: The Hobby Protection Act (1972) as Amended By the Collectible Coin Protection Act (2014)
The Black Cabinet
A database of counterfeit coinage.
http://www.theblackcabinet.org
A settlement is a let down.
<< <i>I wanted to hear the judge's opinion
A settlement is a let down. >>
I agree. But I do commend any man for standing his ground and up for his principles. The idea and action is commendable.
It's a pity that the "act" perpetrated on some innocent victims lead us into court to even discuss the legalities and formalities that seem so unsettled, every single time a new case is opened.
So on that note, and in closing my thoughts on it all… Kudos to the OP for his valiant effort.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>This case represents everything wrong in this country. As sad day indeed. >>
We may have been separated at birth
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>It sounds to me like the only winner in this case was the lawyers. >>
When no one is actually harmed and it's a nuisance case that is the likely outcome.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Wouldn't it be ironic if these copy ASE proof rounds end up being more valuable than the real thing? >>
With frivolous law suits there are often unintended consequences. I was thinking along your lines earlier.
M
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby?
The Black Cabinet
A database of counterfeit coinage.
http://www.theblackcabinet.org
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
I sure these same beginning collectors would pay a million dollars for a MS67 1881-S Morgan since it looks like a 1893-S. This was only a win for the lawyers, no one else.
I suppose it was a win for baseball when some lawyer won a suit against Louisville Slugger for one of their bats being used in a baseball game.
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
I agree. People who are always arguing for letting stuff go with rip-offs and dishonesty are being the devil's advocates. When you keep letting fraud go, shrugging your shoulders not taking legal action you end up hating yourself; the anger has to be directed to the cause of the fraud and let the wheels of justice work, though there are usually lots of people around telling you like an ANA governor once told me that the god of numismatics will bless you if you ignore the fraud and move on.
<< <i>I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
There was no ruling in the case. So it has NOT been established that the "Westminster Mint" broke any laws here. (Presumed "innocent" until "convicted" and all that).
I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread.
But I would be careful when claiming that a company had broken the law.
<< <i>Has anyone looked up some of the history on this private mint and their associated business and dealings if not you should, it is interesting. >>
It looks like there have been some complaints filed against them and reported on Ripoff Report.
Mostly complaints about slow shipping times. I saw one other report of them billing for and shipping unwanted/unsolicited items, but that may have been about a similarly-named UK company.
They appear to be a BBB accredited business.
What else did you find ?
<< <i>
<< <i>But I would be careful when claiming that a company had broken the law. >>
Probably good advice.
I'm thinking an awful lot of readers here are under the mistaken impression that the minters were charged with a crime.
That certainly never happened regarding those rounds and they have broken no laws as far as I'm aware. They haven't even been shown to have violated the HPA, for that matter.
Also, because there was no injunction issued, what's to stop them from making more? Did they agree to that in the settlement?
Even if they did so, and choose to abide by the agreement, there is absolutely nothing that came of this civil suit that can prevent anyone else from making the same rounds. >>
An injunction was part of the settlement as they have agreed not to produce the items anymore. Do people understand that the defendants in this case took the easy way out? By settling they are not subject to the courts ruling and it is very easy to see that by settling they are stating they were wrong of the actions being claimed. If the did not believe this then why did they not fully prosecute this action instead of folding up and laying down like they did?
Steve it is a win for the hobby it is not a win for minters and dealers. You sir are very correct in saying "I have yet to see how this was frivolous. This "mint" broke the law by manufacturing rounds that beginner collectors could easily confuse as the real thing. They even had a raised area on the design where the "copy" mark was obviously intended for, so they *could* be right with the law yet it was left blank.
And now they've been stopped.
How is this not a win for the hobby?"
I also commend the OP for standing up for our hobby and wish more people would. This legal action will cause many private minters to think about what they make as many items from private mints could be confused by those who are not educated the way people on this board are and really how many people in the world are.
If you were not a coin collector and just going about your business on any given day or a child and this coin was in your pocket change, face up, would you even think twice about it? (answer the question truthfully and I know that will be hard for some not because they are liers but because of basic attitudes)
so he won over a minor issue big deal
not impressed at all he has done very little to combat the fake coin issue
now take out the top people in the fake coin making biz and get them into jail then i'll be impressed
till then he is a very minor player in the fight against fake coins
Coins for Sale: Both Graded and Ungraded
https://photos.app.goo.gl/oqym2YtcS7ZAZ73D6
Class Counsel Fees and Expenses ... not to exceed $110,000
Incentive award ... the $1,000 payment that the Defendants have agreed to pay to the named-Plaintiff
Defendants "agree that all Silver Rounds of the type described herein and manufactured by them in the future will be stamped "COPY""
(emphasis added) so... no OTHER silver round design is included, if they sell the dies to somebody else and purchase the same rounds w/o copy for resale it's not covered...
Section VIII (release) "By this Settlement Agreement and the following Release, Defendants and ... are released from any and all claims or causes of action ... arising out of or related to .... alleged violation of the Federal Hobby Protection Act."
In other words, stop claiming they agreed that they violated the HPA. They said no such thing.
XI MISCELANEOUS PROVISIONS
"A. This Settlement Agreement, and the exhibits and related document hereto, are not to be used in evidence and shall not at any time be construed or deemed to be any admission or concession by Defendants with respect to any alleged wrongdoing, fault or omission of any kind whatsoever, regardless of whether or not this Settlement Agreement results in entry of a Final Approval Order as contemplated herein. Defendants specifically deny all of the allegations and in connection with the Litigation or Action. This provision shall survive the expiration of voiding of the Settlement Agreement."
Oh, and don't think you can sue your lawyers for selling you out...
"H. ... Each of the Parties was represented by competent and effective counsel throughout the course of settlement negotiations and in the drafting and execution of this Settlement Agreement, ..."
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i>How is this not a win for the hobby? >>
Because they admitted no guilt. The settlement is basically you can sell back your rounds for spot (a little better than what you get at the LCS), or they'll punch "COPY" into them and return them and they eat postage both ways. And they have to stamp "COPY" on the ones on-hand, but they can continue to sell them.
Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i> D Carr said ...I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread. >>
How about the other defendants in the case, have you had any dealings with Ian Clay, Michael Kott, or the Highland Mint?
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
<< <i>Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction. >>
Yep. Excellent point.
By not having a case in which the defendants have to admit guilt on the record they protect their company from further proceedings and protect their reputation. This becomes very important when a corporation is being audited to figure out liability insurance. It is also important to future estimates as to the companies profitability should they seek financing for any future endeavors.
How many people on a daily basis in the United States go into court civilly and criminally and say " not guilty ", I have very rarely seen anyone in court accused of an action admit that action in the first court date. Think about it.
If the defendants in this case were secure in their possition they would have had no reason to settle. In stead the defendants offered settlement. Should they have prevailed they would have received costs and even possible damages, they would also have a legal decision on the record of law of which they could point to. They do not have this as they determined it was in their best interest to settle.
Anyone can say they did not admit guilt and that is true but they also did not admit that they are not guilty. They don't have to do either with a settlement. Concern from the defendants should be apparent, for those who can not see the fact of this, I for one am at a loss.
<< <i>Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction. >>
Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO.
<< <i>The only ones to make out in this are the attorneys, the people who bought won't send the coins back in to get replacements. >>
Why would they? They paid for an ounce of silver, and that is what they received.
<< <i>Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO. >>
And that is PRECISELY the point. THERE IS NO PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED HERE. Nothing. None. There is no admission of guilt. Go read the terms of the settlement - I posted an extract above. Anybody can sign up for a PACER account and read the same document... unless your charges exceed a minimum amount they even waive them each quarter.
All they did, all the record will show, is that they paid off a nuisance law suit.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i>
<< <i>Precedent Frank; it's all about precedent that could be used in similar suits. And yes, even the Chinese counterfeits fall within the statute so it would be applicable to those too. And with the new statute that makes it tortious to sell them in the U.S. (expanding even the regulations contained in the original HPA), the case was important in terms of precedential value IMHO. >>
And that is PRECISELY the point. THERE IS NO PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED HERE. Nothing. None. There is no admission of guilt. Go read the terms of the settlement - I posted an extract above. Anybody can sign up for a PACER account and read the same document... unless your charges exceed a minimum amount they even waive them each quarter.
All they did, all the record will show, is that they paid off a nuisance law suit. >>
And a $1000 to the lead plaintiff but yes that's the gist of it.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>The only ones to make out in this are the attorneys, the people who bought won't send the coins back in to get replacements. >>
I would send mine in after reading the settlement. Also the attorneys got paid to do a job, no one here knows how much work they put in as they took the case on contingency the attorneys were responsible for all cost from filling, all investigations, paying any personnel who worked on the case and any outside personnel.
This is just like a dealer paying for their overhead through the profits of the coins they sell. Would you honestly begrudge someone getting paid for completed work?
As to no president being shown here that is not really accurate. Any person who reads the posts about this legal action and the case file will see that the defendants folded. This could inspire others that have concerns about numismatic items in our hobby to step up and do something about it. This shows all those that just sit back and say nothing can be done, corporations are too big to take on and one person can not make a change are wrong. One man did make a change for our hobby, by acting on something that he felt needed to be addressed a questionable item to some will be made to comply with the HPA.
Than you Tom for standing up for our hobby as a starting point always needs to be determined.
All of the sides here have made relevant points, and I'll attempt to avoid playing semantics. As to the assertion "Fighting over private-issue 1oz silver rounds when untold millions have been lost on Chinese fakes of actual coins (often in fake slabs) is really an example of putting legal resources in the wrong direction", I disagree wholeheartedly when viewed under the light that American manufacturers spent hundreds of millions in R&D of technology to develop the CD, the player, high resolution TVs, etcetera back in the '80s. The Chinese reverse-engineered this technology and sold it back to us for pennies on the dollar, effectively destroying companies who could never recover their ROI. They sued, they WON, and they did get injunctions against the Chinese (state-owned) companies that stole their licensed and patented wares. What did it get them?? NOTHING. It's been going on ever since, the Chinese are simply expanding into the realm of TPG copying with their expertise in stealing tradecraft. They are masters of the art, and they know there are no punitive measures coming from our Attorney General's office.
As to the plaintiffs and why they did not see this through court; same reason everyone with an airtight case folds and settles in the end...there is absolutely no guarantee how the court will rule. You can have the facts on your side, you can have history on your side, you can have a better team of lawyers on your side. But in the end, one weighs the risk vs. reward and chooses. I worked for an employer who garnered a reputation for being an "easy mark" in my trade because of their history of settling frivolous suits (NOT saying this case was frivolous). It was incredibly frustrating. But a good client listens to their attorney.
Very few people have bottomless pockets. The smart ones retain their deep pockets because they are smart enough not to fight a battle to "winner take all" end unless they know the outcome. Unless you've sat in court, listened to a judge admonish both parties to come to a settlement or he/she would be extremely unhappy, it is easy to say "I'd fight it to the end!!". It is another thing to walk back into court and tell that same judge you have decided to tie up their court with a trial.
JMHO...seasoned with some experience in seven-figure settlements that I desperately wanted to fight on principle. But it was not my money.
<< <i>
<< <i> D Carr said ...I'm not here to defend Westminster Mint - I've never had any dealings with them and the only thing I know about them is what I've read in this thread. >>
How about the other defendants in the case, have you had any dealings with Ian Clay, Michael Kott, or the Highland Mint? >>
Not that I know of.
Should I know them ?
What did they do (if anything) ?
Suppose I like the "Walking Liberty" design.
I want some cheap silver bullion rounds but I don't want the added markup of Silver Eagles.
I DON'T want "COPY" on my silver. That will make them harder to sell.
What if years from now one of my heirs goes to liquidate the rounds but they notice "COPY" on them.
What does that mean ?
Does that mean they are copies of silver rounds ?
Does that mean they aren't real silver ?
What if my heir disposes of them in the recycle bin because they didn't realize the rounds really were actual silver ?
I'm not ever going to buy silver rounds with "COPY" on them because when I go to sell them potential buyers might then think they are made of imitation (copy) silver.
The end result here is that one of my choices has been taken away.
I'm not allowed to purchase the rounds from the producer in the form I prefer.
[End of hypothetical scenario].
Obviously, you were bothered by these rounds being sold.
I'm just wondering, when deciding to file this lawsuit, did you consider that fact that some people might be disappointed at losing this product choice ?
<< <i>Yes, it's the final piece of the puzzle too, seemingly revealing the actual intention behind the suit. >>
It's only now, when the man behind the curtain is revealed, that we question the Wizard's motives... I will credit the OP with more personal integrity than that.
Although much like Don Quixote should have known there were things about Rocinante that made him not the ideal choice, neither OP nor the rest of us asked questions about the lawyers involved... until now. Lesson learned: We all should have looked closer at the definition of 'win' from a law firm whose tag line is "We take cases other law firms have turned down. And we win." Had we looked, we might have been able to counsel OP that when he signed up with them he lost any control over the purpose of the litigation. Sadly, once you signed up with these attorneys, just because they let you sit in the right front seat and choose the tunes on the radio, didn't mean you were driving the bus.
Let's look at Settlement Chasers, LLP - emphasis added to quotations from their home page, http://www.denittislaw.com/
<< <i>Attorneys at the firm:
Prepare every case as if it is going to trial >>
As if is a little odd - shouldn't winning a class action involve going to court and proving your allegations. Guess not... their history and bombast - http://www.denittislaw.com/verdicts-and-settlements/ - shows settlement after settlement - and a history of overstating the impact of their settlements... especially this one:
<< <i>Consumer Fraud Class Actions
$9,000,000 – DeMarco v. National Collector’s Mint, 229 F.R.D. 73 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
The settlement, on behalf of a class of 176,000 people, provided a full refund (equaling almost $9,000,000) to people who bought the Freedom Tower Silver Dollar from National Collector’s Mint, Inc. (NCM) between September 1, 2004 and May 31, 2005. The class complaint alleged that NCM misrepresented the authenticity of the Freedom Tower Silver Dollars it sold to consumers. The class also claimed that NCM violated the Hobby Protection Act 15 U.S.C. § 2101(b) and should have marked the Freedom Tower Silver Dollars they sold with the word “COPY”. The case was a matter of first impression in the United Stated District Court for Southern District of New York, and is now a published opinion in the Federal Reporters. September 2005. >>
Dissect that...
The class complaint allegedand claimed - you can allege or claim darn near ANYTHING in a complaint.
and
is now a published opinion. Truth? Yes, there is an opinion - anyone can Google for DeMARCO v. NATIONAL COLLECTOR'S MINT, 229 F.R.D. 73 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
but what was decided was NOT a violation of the HPA or a precedent in any stretch of the imagination:
<< <i>Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons the Defendants' motion to dismiss per Rule 12(b)(6) is DENIED, the Defendants' motion to dismiss per Rule 8 is DENIED, and the Plaintiff's motion to certify the class per Rule 23 (b)(2) is GRANTED.
This constitutes the decision and order of the Court. >>
So the attorneys were successful in getting the class certified whereupon NCM settled. That's not a precedent about the HPA or anything. It's just a step in a process... the requirements to get a class certified are much higher than to merely file a case, but they in no way settle anything as fact or precedent.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
<< <i>"And a $1000 to the lead plaintiff but yes that's the gist of it."
Yes, it's the final piece of the puzzle too, seemingly revealing the actual intention behind the suit.
HPA/CCPA Courtesy SteveCaruso
The relief available through legal suits filed under the HPA/CCPA is clearly stated in the text of the Act (link above.)
*If* a plaintiff prevails, they can obtain an injunction halting the production/distribution of the replicas unless stamped COPY.
The successful plaintiff can also recover legal fees.
But that is all the court can give them. That's the extent of it. Go read it and see.
The 'named plaintiff' is going to get $1,000 *only* because they agreed to drop the suit in exchange for the settlement agreement. If they hadn't agreed to drop the suit in exchange for the cash and the virtually worthless agreement to start using a COPY punch, there was no way anybody got any cash *except* the lawyers.
And the lawyers would get nothing if they did not win. There was virtually no real chance they could have won.
The only possibility of establishing the threshold for "imitation numismatic items" that they claimed they wanted to establish, was by the precedent that would come from an actual ruling by the court.
The only way to guarantee $$ for the originator of the suit and the lawyers, was to settle. They chose the money instead of the precedent they claimed they wanted to establish. Whether money was the goal all along, only the originator of the suit knows with certainty.
It's all very simple, and it's all 'in black and white'.
It's quite stunning to see some people still clinging to the idea that this suit was filed to "help the hobby". It's unbelievable that they somehow have convinced themselves that it did, despite the outcome.
They say you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink. You can also lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. >>
Seriously you think the OP went through all the work that this required for $1000.00? You have stated you know what it takes to prosecute a suit and are begrudging $1000.00, seems like you are really reaching. How about you actually talk to the OP and see what his intentions were and are instead of publicly discounting his motives witout any evidence.
A man who refuses to open his eyes can not see what is in front of them.
Here is some other information to help someone reading this thread that has no legal information have a better understanding.
http://class-actions.lawyers.com/lawyer-fees-in-class-actions.html class-actions.lawyers.com/lawyer-fees-in-class-action
Some very good information: http://www.classactionlitigation.com/faq.html
How do corporations improperly avoid class actions in consumer litigation?
In the early 1900's congress passed a law called the "Federal Arbitration Act." This law which was intended to apply only to merchants engaged in interstate commerce at the time it was passed, is now in the 1990's being used as a weapon against consumers. Arbitration was intended to be a process whereby equally sophisticated businessmen could negotiate an agreement with each other to submit any dispute they might have to an independent third party for resolution instead of a court. The theory was that as to businessmen, the law should permit an alternative method for them to quickly resolve their differences outside of court. The fact is that most businesses engaged in such transactions have lawyers on retainer or on staff to negotiate such agreements, they fully understand the ramifications of arbitration, and the terms of the arbitration are agreed to by parties of equal bargaining strength.
Corporations are now using the same law to abuse the American consumer. Contracts with arbitration clauses involving credit, banking, insurance, and even home construction projects are now appearing with increasing frequency. An arbitration clause is particularly insidious when included in contracts of adhesion, i.e., contracts between businesses and consumers offered solely on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. Why are such arbitration clauses bad for consumers?classactionlitigation.com/faq
<< <i>
The relief available through legal suits filed under the HPA/CCPA is clearly stated in the text of the Act (link above.)
*If* a plaintiff prevails, they can obtain an injunction halting the production/distribution of the replicas unless stamped COPY.
The successful plaintiff can also recover legal fees.
But that is all the court can give them. That's the extent of it. Go read it and see. >>
This is just not factually correct, I went to your link as you suggest, and it says that not only can they get injunctive relief, but you can also get damages. I added the bolding
SEC. 3. (a) In General.–If any person violates section 2 (a) or (b) or a rule under section 2 (c), any interested person may commence a civil action for injunctive relief restraining such violation, and for damages, in any United States District Court for a district in which the defendant resides,
I look forward to answering all of your questions, and dcarr's questions when the suit is fully resolved and the settlement is approved by the court. Until then I think it is prudent for me to just stick to the facts. It is rather difficult to restrain myself when people seem to be going after me personally, but I understood that was a possibility when I started this thread.
Join the fight against Minnesota's unjust coin dealer tax law.
<< <i>"And a $1000 to the lead plaintiff but yes that's the gist of it."
Yes, it's the final piece of the puzzle too, seemingly revealing the actual intention behind the suit.
HPA/CCPA Courtesy SteveCaruso
It's all very simple, and it's all 'in black and white'.
It's quite stunning to see some people still clinging to the idea that this suit was filed to "help the hobby". It's unbelievable that they somehow have convinced themselves that it did, despite the outcome.
They say you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink. You can also lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. >>
While some have their heart in the right place I can't help but feel many have their heads up their_ _ _. ...............They want to believe.
Whatever. The plaintiff wasn't never hurt and frankly no one else was either. IMO this was a calculated lawsuit that was frivolous and the outcome set less then zero effective precedence. If anything it gives more leeway to private minters that are actually unscrupulous. They now have floor on their downside in which to operate.
This was no win for the hobby nor did I ever think that was ever the intent. JMHO. A $1000 to the lead plaintiff and lawyers got paid. Thats what happened.
A private minter was targeted and for what atrocities ? Selling a one ounce round of silver that actually contained an ounce of silver in it. This whole escapade actually makes collectors out to be idiots that need to be saved from themselves. This whole thing gives me a bad taste in my mouth. I'm done with thread thread. It creeps me out.
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
Now I'm wondering where this is going to go. Now that your lawyers have beaten some little small time company into submission so that they have had to cut their losses and move on, are you going after the big guys now?
MCM - Modern Coin Mart or APMEX - American Precious Metals Exchange or one of the other big bullion dealers?
They all sell similar items, you know. They have "copies" of buffalo nickels, mercury dimes, peace and morgan dollars, etc, and none have "copy" on them. And they are much better quality than the small time minters. So much so that MCM has the following disclaimer on their "peace dollar" silver rounds:
*This item is a .999 Fine Silver Round - Not an actual Peace Dollar
Sounds like it is pretty close to the coin. It doesn't matter, most people will be able to tell the difference and some people you just can't save from themselves.
And I don't care. I like both MCM and APMEX, I don't think they, or the dealer you went after, are doing anything wrong and I do business with MCM and APMEX regularly and will continue to do so. In fact, while I was looking at their inventories just now, I found one of their silver bullion coin-type items that I like and I am going to purchase it.
Well, congratulations again and good luck with whatever you decide to do.