@ms70 said:
From what I'm reading solely in this thread, it seems to be the "mechanical error" in printing a label is the ace-in-the-hole for PCGS not to pay out on their guarantee. Who can prove if it is or isn't? If that's the case I find it disappointing and the guarantee worth zero.
On line promotion says this -
Maximum Value
All PCGS graded coins are backed by the PCGS guarantee of grade and authenticity, instilling confidence in both buyers and sellers.
@ms70 said:
From what I'm reading solely in this thread, it seems to be the "mechanical error" in printing a label is the ace-in-the-hole for PCGS not to pay out on their guarantee. Who can prove if it is or isn't? If that's the case I find it disappointing and the guarantee worth zero.
On line promotion says this -
Maximum Value
All PCGS graded coins are backed by the PCGS guarantee of grade and authenticity, instilling confidence in both buyers and sellers.
Go figure.
Confidence is earned over a long period of time but lost in mere seconds. I'm referring to confidence in their guarantee as well as their grading.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Receiving clerks don't assign coin numbers, the graders do.
From the PCGS coin number lookup page.
"The PCGS Coin Lookup tables list preliminary coin numbers that are used to complete PCGS Submission forms. Certain coin numbers have been omitted from these tables to avoid misidentification of coins. PCGS graders assign more specific coin numbers when they grade your coins."
So what kind of simple error would result in the insert being messed up so badly?
Well, they do assign or verify the basic coin numbers, as the coins are already listed after the orders are received. In fact, I got an email yesterday from a clerk telling me I choose the wrong coin number on my online order. I also just went and tried it and I am able to chooses 1909 VDB Proof. You can't choose DMPL on Morgans for instance, or some other attributes. Those are assigned later. Who knows what happened but the dude could definitely have submitted it as a proof from the online form.
Receiving clerks don't assign coin numbers, the graders do.
From the PCGS coin number lookup page.
"The PCGS Coin Lookup tables list preliminary coin numbers that are used to complete PCGS Submission forms. Certain coin numbers have been omitted from these tables to avoid misidentification of coins. PCGS graders assign more specific coin numbers when they grade your coins."
So what kind of simple error would result in the insert being messed up so badly?
Well, they do assign or verify the basic coin numbers, as the coins are already listed after the orders are received. In fact, I got an email yesterday from a clerk telling me I choose the wrong coin number on my online order. I also just went and tried it and I am able to chooses 1909 VDB Proof. You can't choose DMPL on Morgans for instance, or some other attributes. Those are assigned later. Who knows what happened but the dude could definitely have submitted it as a proof from the online form.
As I corrected later I was looking at the print version available online to download, print and fill out and not the actual online version that you fill in and submit electronically. There it says coin number is optional which means they will look it up. Also suggests they will verify whatever coin number that you put in the blank. The online version of the coin number lookup is NOT a complete listing.
You can't choose PCGS coin# 97151 if you believe your 1884 Morgan is a DMPL? Or 7151 if you think it's PL?
I don't know...I haven't tried it with the online form. But when I'm completing a handwritten submission for a coin with special attributes I want certified (VAM, variety, die marriage, copper color, etc.) I always go to Coinfacts and look up the proper coin number. That doesn't guarantee anything but it does cite what I believe the coin to be.
MS VDB's are 2423, 2424, 2425 (BN, RB, RD respectively)
PR VDB's are 3300, 3301, 3302
We'll probably never know why and how PCGS erred in assigning 3301 instead of 2424.
Lance.
Receiving clerks don't assign coin numbers, the graders do.
From the PCGS coin number lookup page.
"The PCGS Coin Lookup tables list preliminary coin numbers that are used to complete PCGS Submission forms. Certain coin numbers have been omitted from these tables to avoid misidentification of coins. PCGS graders assign more specific coin numbers when they grade your coins."
So what kind of simple error would result in the insert being messed up so badly?
Well, they do assign or verify the basic coin numbers, as the coins are already listed after the orders are received. In fact, I got an email yesterday from a clerk telling me I choose the wrong coin number on my online order. I also just went and tried it and I am able to chooses 1909 VDB Proof. You can't choose DMPL on Morgans for instance, or some other attributes. Those are assigned later. Who knows what happened but the dude could definitely have submitted it as a proof from the online form.
As I corrected later I was looking at the print version available online to download, print and fill out and not the actual online version that you fill in and submit electronically. There it says coin number is optional which means they will look it up. Also suggests they will verify whatever coin number that you put in the blank. The online version of the coin number lookup is NOT a complete listing.
The clerks also assign the coin number on the manual form. I also have one of those in and the coins were listed immediately after the order was posted. That is why there is a disclaimer on the order page saying "Description (Subject to Revision)". Do you actually submit coins or are you making this all up as you go?
Receiving clerks don't assign coin numbers, the graders do.
From the PCGS coin number lookup page.
"The PCGS Coin Lookup tables list preliminary coin numbers that are used to complete PCGS Submission forms. Certain coin numbers have been omitted from these tables to avoid misidentification of coins. PCGS graders assign more specific coin numbers when they grade your coins."
So what kind of simple error would result in the insert being messed up so badly?
Well, they do assign or verify the basic coin numbers, as the coins are already listed after the orders are received. In fact, I got an email yesterday from a clerk telling me I choose the wrong coin number on my online order. I also just went and tried it and I am able to chooses 1909 VDB Proof. You can't choose DMPL on Morgans for instance, or some other attributes. Those are assigned later. Who knows what happened but the dude could definitely have submitted it as a proof from the online form.
As I corrected later I was looking at the print version available online to download, print and fill out and not the actual online version that you fill in and submit electronically. There it says coin number is optional which means they will look it up. Also suggests they will verify whatever coin number that you put in the blank. The online version of the coin number lookup is NOT a complete listing.
The clerks also assign the coin number on the manual form. I also have one of those in and the coins were listed immediately after the order was posted. That is why there is a disclaimer on the order page saying "Description (Subject to Revision)". Do you actually submit coins or are you making this all up as you go?
I have not submitted direct in a long time. I was looking only at the download and print submission form where it says coin number is optional. If you go to the online coin number lookup
they have coin number 2425 for 1909 VDB MSRD and 3302 for 1909 VDB PRRD.
I'm guessing that logging in and filling out the form offers more info/options.
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not.
What you say is somewhat true, but people are forgetting that SUBMITTERS can/do put down the coin number when they create the submission slip, just as Modcrewman outlined in some posts above.
Since this submitter thought it was a PROOF and he was looking for PCGS to authenticate as such, it is likely he put down the coin # for 1909 VDB proof.
Long time forum members may remember years ago when a few instances of this happened and I believe RUSS was one who brought it up...and may have even done an experiment on it as well...I believe he submitted a normal kennedy as an AH kennedy and it came back that way.
So, it SHOULD have been noticed AND corrected by PCGS but if someone missed it, or got lazy, and the submitter had listed it as the proof 1909 vdb issue on the submission form, then that is how it happened. Just as, or more, likely than blaming someone at PCGS for confusing MS and PR (just a different sort of blame).
@oih82w8 said:
I wonder if there was an actual PR65 VDB is the same building which got the certs switched around? Anything is possible. Could you imaging the stink that the submitter off an actual VDB proof would be thinking after it received an MS or details grade?
Anything is possible. I imagine it was graded generously at MS65RB because of the nice color and was entered incorrectly. Data entry errors cannot be 100% avoided.
He submitted it on the submission form as a 1909 VDB proof,
Receiving clerk looks at coin...says yup...1909 VDB,
Coin goes through grading, graders look at coin for their 5-10 seconds and say 65RB and look at the sheet quickly and say, "Yup, 1909 VDB. Next coin please." It may have been so obvious to them that it wasn't a proof that they never though twice about comparing it to the submission form.
Finalizer repeats step 3,
Certificate is printed from data entered by clerk in #2,
Voila - PR65 RB
Why do I believe this is the case? This thread is why. Do I think for one second that they thought my quarter was a nickel? No, I don't. Do I believe that no one bothered to compare it to the submission form I prepared? Yes, I do.
Receiving clerks don't assign coin numbers, the graders do.
From the PCGS coin number lookup page.
"The PCGS Coin Lookup tables list preliminary coin numbers that are used to complete PCGS Submission forms. Certain coin numbers have been omitted from these tables to avoid misidentification of coins. PCGS graders assign more specific coin numbers when they grade your coins."
So what kind of simple error would result in the insert being messed up so badly?
If they say a coin is a proof and I sell it as a proof but it is actually a business strike, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
If they say a coin is genuine and it turns out to be a Chinese fake and I sell it as genuine, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
What am I paying the professionals for? An opinion on a grade is one thing to screw up but my two examples above are not based on opinions of a grade. Proof and Mint State are 2 different things. Real and Fake are 2 different things. If they get that wrong, they are not liable? I guess I don't really understand the guarantee they provide. I know someone's going to tell me proof and mint state are part of the grade and it is just an opinion but I find that hard to agree with. They are the experts. I am paying them to get a grading opinion. I expect them to know the difference between business strike and proof and between fake and real. Rick's example shows this is not just a one time label error. If the opinion of the 3rd party grading company is that it is a proof but someone else says it's mint state, they won't stand behind that? If they change their mind after the fact, I am liable?
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay.
I don't think it works like that unless someone plans on suing the original submitter and proving intent, as well as proving incompetence on the part of PCGS.
If that were the case then every PCGS customer would have to fear liability when selling their PCGS graded coins.
PCGS can't just sit there and blame their printer.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
What exactly does the PCGS guarantee entail, then? Isn't that guarantee, by definition, intended to cover circumstances in which a coin was erroneously graded? Does it only cover issues where a coin may be improperly or overgraded vs misattributed?
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.
Screw this guy with his $1 pay-per-view. I'm charging $.75 per view of my coins. And I'm offering a semi topless standing liberty quarter and a busty 1795 bust half AND dollar. I will be selling DVDs of my coins for $19.99 and setting up a 900 hotline where you can hear some silver on silver and gold on gold action.
@ChrisRx said:
Pcgs owes him nothing other than free shipping to and from for the proper grade/body bag.
PCGS will end up buying back the coin for $10,000-$20,000 ....chump change compared to the hit on their name if coin remains in public hand ..
Would you want that in writing BEFORE you returned the coin?
yes indeed .. payment with certified check only ..and lawyer writing agreement.
At least this forum saved a dealer from holding the bag on this misgraded coin
@roadrunner said:
LP: "Didn't see where you said I was going to sell it...No wasn't forsale and still not...Just was something for the Great Grand Kids to enjoy...YIS..LP."
But, what happens when the grand kids take this to sell someday and they get $40K from someone? What if old LP got hit by a car tomorrow and the family sells the coin to help pay for medical expenses? See the problem here Larry? Now there are some chuckle heads suggesting he take legal action by having a lawyer investigate PCGS and review their internal records.
Caveat Emptor applies here.
right on the money Bajjerfan.. worse PCGS grading Reputation gets hurt, which is why PCGS should make effort to quickly get the coin back..
Free PCGS return Postage ..?? LOL
Coin owner will take the money .. some poor college grad ?
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
I don't see liability for the original submitter for advertising the piece as graded by PCGS as XYZ, and even if you could impute liability, a 10 year old claim would almost certainly be beyond the statute of limitations. Why is it that you maintain that the grading service is absolved of all liability but someone relying on an erroneous TPGS opinion, even innocently, is liable unless the seller made some sort of guarantee?
If they say a coin is a proof and I sell it as a proof but it is actually a business strike, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
If they say a coin is genuine and it turns out to be a Chinese fake and I sell it as genuine, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
What am I paying the professionals for? An opinion on a grade is one thing to screw up but my two examples above are not based on opinions of a grade. Proof and Mint State are 2 different things. Real and Fake are 2 different things. If they get that wrong, they are not liable? I guess I don't really understand the guarantee they provide. I know someone's going to tell me proof and mint state are part of the grade and it is just an opinion but I find that hard to agree with. They are the experts. I am paying them to get a grading opinion. I expect them to know the difference between business strike and proof and between fake and real. Rick's example shows this is not just a one time label error. If the opinion of the 3rd party grading company is that it is a proof but someone else says it's mint state, they won't stand behind that? If they change their mind after the fact, I am liable?
Amazing. I just learned something today.
Generally speaking, if PCGS says the coin is genuine and it turns out to be fake, the grade guarantee protects the owner.
What PCGS is trying to protect itself from are "obvious" mistakes that ought to be realized...a nickel's slab says it's a quarter. An 1825 bust half is labeled 1815. These are blunders any sentient being should recognize.
The question is where you draw the line. PCGS cites examples of mistakes not covered by its grade guarantee, one of which is a proof that is "obviously" a business strike or vice versa. Naturally, PCGS wants final say on such matters. (No doubt the courts have final say for those who choose to litigate.)
Suppose PCGS certifies a poor quality counterfeit coin. Should it be able to assert it was a mechanical mistake because the counterfeit was so obvious? Obvious to whom? What proficiency can reasonably be expected of everyday collectors who pay experts for grade and authenticity opinions?
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
I don't see liability for the original submitter for advertising the piece as graded by PCGS as XYZ, and even if you could impute liability, a 10 year old claim would almost certainly be beyond the statute of limitations. Why is it that you maintain that the grading service is absolved of all liability but someone relying on an erroneous TPGS opinion, even innocently, is liable unless the seller made some sort of guarantee?
Wouldn't the guarantee be in force as long as the coin remains in it's original holder?
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
I don't see liability for the original submitter for advertising the piece as graded by PCGS as XYZ, and even if you could impute liability, a 10 year old claim would almost certainly be beyond the statute of limitations. Why is it that you maintain that the grading service is absolved of all liability but someone relying on an erroneous TPGS opinion, even innocently, is liable unless the seller made some sort of guarantee?
Wouldn't the guarantee be in force as long as the coin remains in it's original holder?
Yes, subject to the terms of the guarantee. The guarantee and submission forms are binding contracts. If the contract specifically excepts mechanical errors, then the dispositive question is whether this is a mechanical error. The plain meaning of the guarantee controls:
Clerical or "mechanical" errors. PCGS occasionally makes clerical errors in inputting data which is shown on the insert in the PCGS holder; consequently the PCGS Guarantee does not cover obvious clerical errors, what we call "mechanical errors." The key concept is how obvious the error is to the naked eye. If you can easily tell just by looking at the coin that the description on the holder is wrong, then the coin/holder combination is not covered by the PCGS Guarantee. Examples would include the following:...
Proofs shown as regular strikes and regular strikes shown as proofs. For example, if you had an obvious regular strike 1907 $2.5 gold piece, but the PCGS holder showed the coin as a proof, this coin would not be covered by the PCGS Guarantee as the difference between a regular strike and proof 1907 $2.5 is obvious.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
I guess you could keep a misattributed coin as a souvenir and conversation piece. Yet, the temptation to sell it off as a proof would be a dangerous thing. It would be nagging you constantly with that little devil on your shoulder sweet talking about all those fun things you could do with the money.
You can say "no" a million times but just one "yes" and there's your trouble. You would think anyone buying such a coin would check the Cert but you never know. There are careless people out there and the desire to have a super rare coin could easily cloud up a persons thinking.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
If PCGS chooses to make EagleEye's customer whole, and the original submitter happens to be a respected dealer (with a reputation to uphold and/or a relationship with PCGS they value), then things could work out exactly as EagleEye describes.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
If PCGS chooses to make EagleEye's customer whole, and the original submitter happens to be a respected dealer (with a reputation to uphold and/or a relationship with PCGS they value), then things could work out exactly as EagleEye describes.
No chance whatsoever. 10 years later someone finds out PCGS screwed up back then and now they have to pay? Nope.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
If PCGS chooses to make EagleEye's customer whole, and the original submitter happens to be a respected dealer (with a reputation to uphold and/or a relationship with PCGS they value), then things could work out exactly as EagleEye describes.
What if the original submitter is dead or dies this month? What if the original submitter thought it might be a proof and PCGS sent it back in a PR holder? Matte proofs vs business strikes are often not obvious, particularly to the uninitiated. To say the original submitter is liable precludes numerous eventualities.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
Rick, I understand your explanation of PCGS Terms and Conditions as to the present, but 10 years ago the Terms may have been different. But all of that aside, PCGS has established themselves as an "expert" in matters such as these and their duty is much higher than is the duty of a dealer to their clients. I think in a court of law PCGS looses that one.
I think in the end the total liability will be the auction price of the coin which was 60-something dollars? I think if the current owner sold it for $40K things would then be a different story.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
@ms70 said:
I think in the end the total liability will be the auction price of the coin which was 60-something dollars? I think if the current owner sold it for $40K things would then be a different story.
In this case I think you are correct. Damages only incur if the coin is sold to someone that relys on the PCGS sticker and pays $40K. Rick Snow's case has whiskers and there may have been multiple transactions of that coin after it was certified by PCGS.
I feel really bad for this guy. You buy a coin cheap and submit it attributed yourself as a rarity and then get a slab back with full vindication from the number one authentication business in the world, just to have it ripped away by some internet sleuths after a little bragging. For a potentially life-changing amount of money a few free submissions would not be enough to get me to send it back to you (IMO) if I was in this guys shoes.
@thebigeng said:
Ok now would
Be a bad time to send in a matte proof Lincoln for grading to pcgs if your unsure it is one !
There are 2 good resource books on matte proofs where you can arm yourself with all the information you need. After a short time, you would be able to ID proofs with confidence. Then you'd know prior to submitting the coin whether or not it was a genuine proof. The titles and authors:
1) A Study of Matte Proof Lincoln Cents by Carl B. Waltz Jr.
2) Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs by Kevin Flynn
I bought both of them and they are filled with highly detailed and well magnified images that show all the identifying marks and die lines on all the dates. Both books also break down the different dies that were used and how you can tell which pair was used on any genuine coin.
Also, PCGS has enough graders that your chances of getting the same ones who did Larry Pelf's coin are extremely unlikely. This anomaly shouldn't create any fear.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
Rick, I understand your explanation of PCGS Terms and Conditions as to the present, but 10 years ago the Terms may have been different. But all of that aside, PCGS has established themselves as an "expert" in matters such as these and their duty is much higher than is the duty of a dealer to their clients. I think in a court of law PCGS looses that one.
It doesn't look like Rick is citing PCGS Terms and Conditions. I intepret it as saying that if PCGS is not accountable for the error then blame/liability automatically defaults to the seller of the coin.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
Rick, I understand your explanation of PCGS Terms and Conditions as to the present, but 10 years ago the Terms may have been different. But all of that aside, PCGS has established themselves as an "expert" in matters such as these and their duty is much higher than is the duty of a dealer to their clients. I think in a court of law PCGS looses that one.
It doesn't look like Rick is citing PCGS Terms and Conditions. I intepret it as saying that if PCGS is not accountable for the error then blame/liability automatically defaults to the seller of the coin.
A question for any lawyers out there. If the guy does not return the coin to PCGS. Could PCGS send him a certified legal letter stating that it was a mechanical error and is not a matte proof and by them informing him this and he still sells it later on (knowing it is not a matte proof) he is committing fraud and is legally and criminally responsible? Would that protect PCGS legally if a future buyer goes after PCGS?
If PCGS had any liability (and I do not believe it does as it is spelled out very clearly in the guarantee), sending the submitter a letter would not absolve that liability to third parties without knowledge of the letter. If the letter was ever discovered by the victim of the fraud, it would be damning against the initial seller however.
@EagleEye said:
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
Rick, I understand your explanation of PCGS Terms and Conditions as to the present, but 10 years ago the Terms may have been different. But all of that aside, PCGS has established themselves as an "expert" in matters such as these and their duty is much higher than is the duty of a dealer to their clients. I think in a court of law PCGS looses that one.
It doesn't look like Rick is citing PCGS Terms and Conditions. I intepret it as saying that if PCGS is not accountable for the error then blame/liability automatically defaults to the seller of the coin.
I understand what you are saying. If PCGS is not accountable then responsibility may go back to the original submitter. And in the case of the OP, the buyer clearly did not buy the coin as a PR. But this differs in the case of Rick Snow's client in that he/she apparently bought the coin in a PCGS holder as PR. And it may have traded multiple times in the PR holder. PCGS grading is supposed to facilitate market making in coins, is it not? In the current case, no one has paid $40K for a coin that is worth only $50. But if a coin has traded multiple times based upon the PCGS grade opinion, then as the premier experts in the business, someone will have a claim against the expert, PCGS. PCGS may have a counter claim against the original submitter, but I think that then they would have to prove intent to defraud on the part of the submitter.
Comments
On line promotion says this -
Maximum Value
All PCGS graded coins are backed by the PCGS guarantee of grade and authenticity, instilling confidence in both buyers and sellers.
Go figure.
Confidence is earned over a long period of time but lost in mere seconds. I'm referring to confidence in their guarantee as well as their grading.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Well, they do assign or verify the basic coin numbers, as the coins are already listed after the orders are received. In fact, I got an email yesterday from a clerk telling me I choose the wrong coin number on my online order. I also just went and tried it and I am able to chooses 1909 VDB Proof. You can't choose DMPL on Morgans for instance, or some other attributes. Those are assigned later. Who knows what happened but the dude could definitely have submitted it as a proof from the online form.
As I corrected later I was looking at the print version available online to download, print and fill out and not the actual online version that you fill in and submit electronically. There it says coin number is optional which means they will look it up. Also suggests they will verify whatever coin number that you put in the blank. The online version of the coin number lookup is NOT a complete listing.
You can't choose PCGS coin# 97151 if you believe your 1884 Morgan is a DMPL? Or 7151 if you think it's PL?
I don't know...I haven't tried it with the online form. But when I'm completing a handwritten submission for a coin with special attributes I want certified (VAM, variety, die marriage, copper color, etc.) I always go to Coinfacts and look up the proper coin number. That doesn't guarantee anything but it does cite what I believe the coin to be.
MS VDB's are 2423, 2424, 2425 (BN, RB, RD respectively)
PR VDB's are 3300, 3301, 3302
We'll probably never know why and how PCGS erred in assigning 3301 instead of 2424.
Lance.
The clerks also assign the coin number on the manual form. I also have one of those in and the coins were listed immediately after the order was posted. That is why there is a disclaimer on the order page saying "Description (Subject to Revision)". Do you actually submit coins or are you making this all up as you go?
What am I missing here (don't want to read all 6 pages, sorry). The PCGS cert number no longer exists? Did they pull the cert?
Free Trial
That is why there is a disclaimer on the order page saying "Description (Subject to Revision)".
Yep, a $40,000 disclaimer. "Because the forum brought this to our attention, we will cancel the cert #"
I have not submitted direct in a long time. I was looking only at the download and print submission form where it says coin number is optional. If you go to the online coin number lookup
they have coin number 2425 for 1909 VDB MSRD and 3302 for 1909 VDB PRRD.
I'm guessing that logging in and filling out the form offers more info/options.
I presently have on David's desk a MS 1909 VDB in a PR64RD holder that my customer bought 10 years ago from a respected dealer. My customer will get protected and the original submitter will pay. The key take-away is that if they made a mistake in grading this coin a PR, the submitter is liable for any future loss anyone claims by buying it as a PR when it is not. It should be sent back before anyone gets hurt.
Never heard of this before.
Yep.
What you say is somewhat true, but people are forgetting that SUBMITTERS can/do put down the coin number when they create the submission slip, just as Modcrewman outlined in some posts above.
Since this submitter thought it was a PROOF and he was looking for PCGS to authenticate as such, it is likely he put down the coin # for 1909 VDB proof.
Long time forum members may remember years ago when a few instances of this happened and I believe RUSS was one who brought it up...and may have even done an experiment on it as well...I believe he submitted a normal kennedy as an AH kennedy and it came back that way.
So, it SHOULD have been noticed AND corrected by PCGS but if someone missed it, or got lazy, and the submitter had listed it as the proof 1909 vdb issue on the submission form, then that is how it happened. Just as, or more, likely than blaming someone at PCGS for confusing MS and PR (just a different sort of blame).
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
So let me get this straight:
If they say a coin is a proof and I sell it as a proof but it is actually a business strike, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
If they say a coin is genuine and it turns out to be a Chinese fake and I sell it as genuine, I am liable, not the professional grading company.
What am I paying the professionals for? An opinion on a grade is one thing to screw up but my two examples above are not based on opinions of a grade. Proof and Mint State are 2 different things. Real and Fake are 2 different things. If they get that wrong, they are not liable? I guess I don't really understand the guarantee they provide. I know someone's going to tell me proof and mint state are part of the grade and it is just an opinion but I find that hard to agree with. They are the experts. I am paying them to get a grading opinion. I expect them to know the difference between business strike and proof and between fake and real. Rick's example shows this is not just a one time label error. If the opinion of the 3rd party grading company is that it is a proof but someone else says it's mint state, they won't stand behind that? If they change their mind after the fact, I am liable?
Amazing. I just learned something today.
I don't think it works like that unless someone plans on suing the original submitter and proving intent, as well as proving incompetence on the part of PCGS.
If that were the case then every PCGS customer would have to fear liability when selling their PCGS graded coins.
PCGS can't just sit there and blame their printer.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
What exactly does the PCGS guarantee entail, then? Isn't that guarantee, by definition, intended to cover circumstances in which a coin was erroneously graded? Does it only cover issues where a coin may be improperly or overgraded vs misattributed?
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.
Screw this guy with his $1 pay-per-view. I'm charging $.75 per view of my coins. And I'm offering a semi topless standing liberty quarter and a busty 1795 bust half AND dollar. I will be selling DVDs of my coins for $19.99 and setting up a 900 hotline where you can hear some silver on silver and gold on gold action.
yes indeed .. payment with certified check only ..and lawyer writing agreement.
At least this forum saved a dealer from holding the bag on this misgraded coin
There is a qualitative difference between certified as authentic, not fake, and that between a PR vs. MS.
right on the money Bajjerfan.. worse PCGS grading Reputation gets hurt, which is why PCGS should make effort to quickly get the coin back..
Free PCGS return Postage ..?? LOL
Coin owner will take the money .. some poor college grad ?
I don't see liability for the original submitter for advertising the piece as graded by PCGS as XYZ, and even if you could impute liability, a 10 year old claim would almost certainly be beyond the statute of limitations. Why is it that you maintain that the grading service is absolved of all liability but someone relying on an erroneous TPGS opinion, even innocently, is liable unless the seller made some sort of guarantee?
Generally speaking, if PCGS says the coin is genuine and it turns out to be fake, the grade guarantee protects the owner.
What PCGS is trying to protect itself from are "obvious" mistakes that ought to be realized...a nickel's slab says it's a quarter. An 1825 bust half is labeled 1815. These are blunders any sentient being should recognize.
The question is where you draw the line. PCGS cites examples of mistakes not covered by its grade guarantee, one of which is a proof that is "obviously" a business strike or vice versa. Naturally, PCGS wants final say on such matters. (No doubt the courts have final say for those who choose to litigate.)
Suppose PCGS certifies a poor quality counterfeit coin. Should it be able to assert it was a mechanical mistake because the counterfeit was so obvious? Obvious to whom? What proficiency can reasonably be expected of everyday collectors who pay experts for grade and authenticity opinions?
Tricky business.
Lance.
Wouldn't the guarantee be in force as long as the coin remains in it's original holder?
LOL, ya right! Try enforcing that one under sooo many different reasons why you can't.
I am not so sure PCGS would not be liable even for the proof coin in this thread, in spite of what some submission form says. They are the ones who screwed up. I imagine the right lawyer would win that case.
Maybe the coin was graded around the Holidays ..Tipsy ?
Yes, subject to the terms of the guarantee. The guarantee and submission forms are binding contracts. If the contract specifically excepts mechanical errors, then the dispositive question is whether this is a mechanical error. The plain meaning of the guarantee controls:
My guess is that since the submitter didn't suffer a loss and the facts are pretty transparent as to what he paid, etc. his case isn't particularly strong. http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=11341
I don't think the owner of the 1909 will ever hand it back to PCGS. I'm sure he is a bit ticked off about the whole deal.
.
I was wrong regarding the guarantee language - it has been there at least since 2013 according to the internet archive.
A $40K can of worms is a lot more interesting than a $400 can of worms for sure.
Not recently.
Lance.
So the same mistake has been made on 2 09 vdb's?
Bochiman. I'm posting like a mad man this month
Thanks! I remembered HRH stating the last one, but I didn't realize that it had made it in to the guarantee.
"And people say you shouldn't buy from Great Southern...."
I suspect some people still say so.
I guess you could keep a misattributed coin as a souvenir and conversation piece. Yet, the temptation to sell it off as a proof would be a dangerous thing. It would be nagging you constantly with that little devil on your shoulder sweet talking about all those fun things you could do with the money.
You can say "no" a million times but just one "yes" and there's your trouble. You would think anyone buying such a coin would check the Cert but you never know. There are careless people out there and the desire to have a super rare coin could easily cloud up a persons thinking.
Ok now would
Be a bad time to send in a matte proof Lincoln for grading to pcgs if your unsure it is one !
If PCGS chooses to make EagleEye's customer whole, and the original submitter happens to be a respected dealer (with a reputation to uphold and/or a relationship with PCGS they value), then things could work out exactly as EagleEye describes.
No chance whatsoever. 10 years later someone finds out PCGS screwed up back then and now they have to pay? Nope.
What if the original submitter is dead or dies this month? What if the original submitter thought it might be a proof and PCGS sent it back in a PR holder? Matte proofs vs business strikes are often not obvious, particularly to the uninitiated. To say the original submitter is liable precludes numerous eventualities.
Rick, I understand your explanation of PCGS Terms and Conditions as to the present, but 10 years ago the Terms may have been different. But all of that aside, PCGS has established themselves as an "expert" in matters such as these and their duty is much higher than is the duty of a dealer to their clients. I think in a court of law PCGS looses that one.
300.... WOW
I think in the end the total liability will be the auction price of the coin which was 60-something dollars? I think if the current owner sold it for $40K things would then be a different story.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
It won't be going to any auction ever as it would get pulled in a heartbeat.
In this case I think you are correct. Damages only incur if the coin is sold to someone that relys on the PCGS sticker and pays $40K. Rick Snow's case has whiskers and there may have been multiple transactions of that coin after it was certified by PCGS.
I feel really bad for this guy. You buy a coin cheap and submit it attributed yourself as a rarity and then get a slab back with full vindication from the number one authentication business in the world, just to have it ripped away by some internet sleuths after a little bragging. For a potentially life-changing amount of money a few free submissions would not be enough to get me to send it back to you (IMO) if I was in this guys shoes.
There are 2 good resource books on matte proofs where you can arm yourself with all the information you need. After a short time, you would be able to ID proofs with confidence. Then you'd know prior to submitting the coin whether or not it was a genuine proof. The titles and authors:
1) A Study of Matte Proof Lincoln Cents by Carl B. Waltz Jr.
2) Lincoln Cent Matte Proofs by Kevin Flynn
I bought both of them and they are filled with highly detailed and well magnified images that show all the identifying marks and die lines on all the dates. Both books also break down the different dies that were used and how you can tell which pair was used on any genuine coin.
Also, PCGS has enough graders that your chances of getting the same ones who did Larry Pelf's coin are extremely unlikely. This anomaly shouldn't create any fear.
It doesn't look like Rick is citing PCGS Terms and Conditions. I intepret it as saying that if PCGS is not accountable for the error then blame/liability automatically defaults to the seller of the coin.
Ding ding
Correct
A question for any lawyers out there. If the guy does not return the coin to PCGS. Could PCGS send him a certified legal letter stating that it was a mechanical error and is not a matte proof and by them informing him this and he still sells it later on (knowing it is not a matte proof) he is committing fraud and is legally and criminally responsible? Would that protect PCGS legally if a future buyer goes after PCGS?
If PCGS had any liability (and I do not believe it does as it is spelled out very clearly in the guarantee), sending the submitter a letter would not absolve that liability to third parties without knowledge of the letter. If the letter was ever discovered by the victim of the fraud, it would be damning against the initial seller however.
I understand what you are saying. If PCGS is not accountable then responsibility may go back to the original submitter. And in the case of the OP, the buyer clearly did not buy the coin as a PR. But this differs in the case of Rick Snow's client in that he/she apparently bought the coin in a PCGS holder as PR. And it may have traded multiple times in the PR holder. PCGS grading is supposed to facilitate market making in coins, is it not? In the current case, no one has paid $40K for a coin that is worth only $50. But if a coin has traded multiple times based upon the PCGS grade opinion, then as the premier experts in the business, someone will have a claim against the expert, PCGS. PCGS may have a counter claim against the original submitter, but I think that then they would have to prove intent to defraud on the part of the submitter.
OINK