Options
Does USPS insurance cover if a holder is damaged during shipment?
Hallco
Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭✭✭
I sent a handful of coins to GC and received the notification that the package has been received. Also stated one of the coins will need to be re-holdered due to damage(costing me $25). I have asked to see picture of the damage, but since I sent the request on a Friday, will probably not hear back until sometime next week. I'm 99.9% sure there was no damage to the PCGS slab before it was mailed. Does anyone have experience with something like this? Thanks in advance for any experience you have in this area.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
No. Insurance is for if something is lost or stolen. The USPS is not responsible for damage, given that mail is handled by machines. The sender is responsible for securing anything fragile in such as way as to prevent damage. Not to mention that $25 is not an insurance claim worth bringing.
from usps site
You can purchase insurance coverage for your mail pieces for up to $5,000 in indemnity to protect against loss or damage. Insurance fees are based on the item’s declared value. There are limitations for insuring some products and certain items.
https://www.usps.com/ship/insurance-extra-services.htm
Ship and Insurance would cover that!
I do believe.....
As mentioned above, the USPS insurance does cover damage, BUT, it is possible that you will need to surrender the item to get reimbursement.
Years ago I knew of someone who received a pair of damaged silver candlesticks and wanted to keep them and accept partial payment for damage, but the USPS said it was all or nothing.
You can explore that more to see what the policy is, but if it were me I'd pay for the reslabbing.
Whenever I buy insurance from the USPS for a package that I'm mailing, the postal clerk always inspects the package to make sure it is securely packaged so refusing to cover damage that they caused while the package was in their possession is totally unreasonable.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
If anyone is interested, the USPS 'fine print' for filing a claim for 'loss/damage' can be found at: https://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/609.htm
of note.........
1.4 When to File
File claims as follows:
Damaged or Missing Contents: customers should file a claim immediately but must file no later than 60 days from the date of mailing.
2.0 Providing Proof of Loss or Damage
If a claim is filed because some or all of the contents are missing or damaged, the addressee must retain the mailing container, including any damaged articles, all packaging, and any contents received. Upon written request by the USPS, the addressee must make this proof available to the local Post Office for inspection, retention, and disposition in accordance with the claims decision. Failure to do so will result in denial of the claim.
i'll look it up when the next mailing comes, but registered can get "lost" for months. personally, i'd rather have the stuff than the insurance money. but you'd have to file or you could be out both and the other hand is if you have the money then they have your stuff. i take it we can return the insurance money to get our stuff?
Source: https://faq.usps.com/s/article/Domestic-Claims-The-Basics
I actually played this scenario through about a year ago on an old, white ANACS holder that got cracked (pretty noticeably) in shipment. Even though in my case I had no way to get in back in an old ANACS holder, the consideration was, would a claim for some very small amount, when the coin was undamaged, even be worth the hassle? I think, at least for me, I determined that it would not be.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Not worth screwing around with USPS. Save time (and money) and just get the piece reholdered is my advice.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Not true. Postal insurance includes damage. It is harder to make a claim though as they may blame the packaging.
thanks!
I filed several claims last year on "Ground Advantage" shipments and got pay-outs on all but the damaged parcel. It looked like the usps had intentionally smashed the PCGS holder. After filing the claim customers often get denied and then appeal until hopefully they honor the claim up to $100.
Thank you for all of the replies. I think at this point, my feelings are hurt more than anything. As a rule, all the coins I hold stay in a safe 99.9% of the time I take pride in the fact that most of them don't have scratches, chips, etc...on the slabs. When I put that specific coin in the Priority flat rate box with the other 4(bubble wrapped, taped and with enough packing material that nothing moved when I shook the box before I gave it to the clerk), I was not aware of any issues with it. I read that reholder does not change the cert# or grade, which I am happy about because it is a pop 1in it's grade with not many higher. I guess it happen next year? No idea how long it will take for them to submit to PCGS, then get it back to GC and then enter into an auction.
pcgs and gc are in the same neighborhood and gc does a lot of business with them. i'm not sure of pcgs' mail rules are, but an account that handles multi-million dollar coins has to have a faster way to get their stuff across town than registered mail
i'm sure gc sends stuff over regularly enough that a simple reholder will be done in short order
as far as the pop 1 viewpoint, pop 1 isn't of value if there are coins with higher grades and especially if they are in higher designations like RD vs RB and PL vs DMPL. however, there is the psychological effect of knowing it is the top pop in a lower, more affordable, designation. are you going for the pshological effect?
When wouldn't they blame the packaging? I've received many items with seriously damaged external boxes in which the contents were intact because they were well padded. I just have to imagine that any internal damage would be blamed on inadequate protection, no matter how badly they mangle the package.
But I never filed a claim, so I admittedly do not know for sure.
When the packaging is good. I know people who have received payment for damaged items. I've even received it once or twice myself, once for a comic slab that was cracked and once for a music box.
Regardless, insurance covers loss AND damage - contrary to the prior post which I'm sure you are now retracting...
Not retracting. Just hedging with the edit to my last post! 😀
As I said, based on all the beat up packages I received with no internal damage, I cannot imagine them taking responsibility for any internal damage, when they know full well that properly protected contents can and do survive anything short of total destruction of the package.
I think you may be overestimating the significance of the apparent damage to the slab. GC gives me notes like that often when the stacking rails are chipped on a holder. Sometimes they decide they need a reholder, and other times they’ll leave it be and just make a noted on the listing title. For a properly packed coin to get damaged in shipping, that would mean it would have had to be pretty mangled by a sorting machine or run over by something, Im betting that it’s not as severe as you think it is and it was something minor that you hadn’t noticed prior to shipping.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Good luck getting USPS to take responsibility for a cracked slab of the box wasn’t totally crushed when delivered. The amount of mental anguish one would put themselves through would be much more aggravating than paying for a reholder.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I wasn't predicting that they would pay. I was simply pointing out that they do sell insurance to cover DAMAGE as well as loss and do pay for damage, at least some of the time. They will not, to your point, pay for damage if they can't inspect the original packaging. I do not know - the OP didn't say - whether there was any damage to the package or whether the packaging was even available at this time.
My friend from NJ gave misinformation that postal insurance does not cover damage. That is simply incorrect and I'm not sure why anyone is arguing otherwise (I don't mean you). Somehow, it is still being contested even after several posters posted the actual postal regulations.
I was actually surprised that they paid on the comic slab. The slab (which was sent to me) actually cracked because it rammed into a second slab in the box. There was very minor, to me superficial, damage to the outer box. But the actual problem was not enough packing material between the two slabs. Nonetheless, they did pay for the damage. It was around $30 IIRC.
Right. Because there is ALWAYS a case to be made. No matter how remote. We get it. You're right and I'm wrong, because there is the theoretical possibility of receiving a $25 reimbursement for a chipped slab in a package that arrives intact. Because DAMAGE. 🤣
As I stated earlier, when I have bought postal insurance, the postal clerk always examines the packaging to make sure it's secure and otherwise adequate although they seem to use any excuse to not pay a claim.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
No, right because regardless of whether you think a claim would be worth bringing or that it would be paid, what you posted (copied below) was clearly flat out incorrect. And considering the reimbursements for damage reported by some posters, this is about more than merely a “theoretical possibility”. Why is it so difficult for you to admit that you were wrong?
“No. Insurance is for if something is lost or stolen. The USPS is not responsible for damage, given that mail is handled by machines. The sender is responsible for securing anything fragile in such as way as to prevent damage. Not to mention that $25 is not an insurance claim worth bringing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I don't collect a huge amount of coins to begin with and when I found that coin(almost 9 years ago), I thought it was a "unique" grade outside of any value consideration. It's a 65+ and it has a Top 100 Vam attribution. It probably has no additional meaning to anyone else, but I think it's a neat find.
Because I'm not wrong. Who reported reimbursements for damage?
All I saw was excerpts from USPS material stating damage was eligible for reimbursement, or for a deduction if a lost item is later recovered and the sender does not want to return the item to the USPS. In other words, theoretical possibility, as I said.
If there was a report here of someone successfully having a claim for damage paid on an item, I missed it.
For those who missed it:
“jmlanzaf Posts: 36,121 ✭✭✭✭✭ July 12, 2025 9:44PM
@NJCoin said:
» show previous quotes
When wouldn't they blame the packaging?
When the packaging is good. I know people who have received payment for damaged items. I've even received it once or twice myself, once for a comic slab that was cracked and once for a music box.
Regardless, insurance covers loss AND damage - contrary to the prior post which I'm sure you are now retracting...“
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Regardless, theoretical, as I said. Because, in my experience, damaged packages have arrived with material perfectly intact.
"I know people" means nothing to me. I did miss the part where @jmlanzaf said he got $30 for a music box and comic book slab. Good for him. I'm surprised they paid under those circumstances with inadequate packaging. So, sure, I guess a payment is theoretically possible.
Shifting from @jmlanzaf's attorney to your day job at Heritage, just how many claims do they submit to their shipper for damaged slabs, given the volume they move every week? Why not talk about that rather than @jmlanzaf's music box when putting me in my place?
Nevertheless, I did already provide the admission you seek.
Stating that there’s a theoretical possibility of reimbursement doesn’t amount to admitting that what you initially posted was incorrect. Man-up - I double dare you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I will, when you relate how Heritage successfully receives reimbursements for all the chipped and scratched slabs it has to replace for its customers due to shipper mishandling, rather than seeking an admission with respect to @jmlanzaf's story about a music box.
You injected yourself here. What's your experience working for one of the largest dealers in the country? Lots of volume. A lot more than $30 at stake. Probably not a single claim. Either paid or denied. Theoretical coverage.
I never trust people who refuse to admit they are wrong even in the face of irrefutable evidence.
Philippians 4:4-7
The hassle of filing a USPS claim is not even worth the $25.
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.
Are we supposed to trust USPS printed policies to be accurate?
At my local post office, if you bring in a box labeled "Fragile", they will ask you if it's well packaged for the insurance. I guess that's because they want lost and stolen packages to be well packaged.
Straw man.
Heritage may well be self-insured.
You should call 60 Minutes to expose the USPS fraud of selling "theoretical coverage".
I know it is a headache to deal with a USPS claim and it isn't really worth going through the hassle for $25.
Not a straw man. Just sayin' don't need the guy who has no first hand experience, despite having exposure to larger volumes than any of us will ever see, lecturing me about your isolated experience and the USPS T&Cs.
Or, because they are going to deny the claim after you say "yes" and then later claim internal damages while the package is intact.
Yes. Irrefutable. Duly noted. You will never trust me. My loss. 😢
News flash - I don’t work in the shipping department or have anything to with or knowledge of shipping claims and their outcomes.
So, after you missed the post which referenced a successful claim and subsequently had it pointed out to you, you decided that it didn’t count so that you could hold on to you “theoretical coverage” position.
You’ve hit a new low.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Neither I nor anyone else here needs first-hand experience to understand that what you posted was incorrect and that you won’t admit it. Now back on ignore you go, as I was clearly wrong in thinking that you might be willing to be open to reason.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I would say that the USPS's own terms of service as already posted is pretty irrefutable, but you do you: "1.Insurance coverage is provided against lost, damage, or missing contents and is limited to a maximum liability of $100 when the pieces bear an Intelligent Mail package barcode (IMpb) or USPS retail tracking barcode and the mailer pays retail or commercial prices".
Everyone on this board knows exactly who, and what you are, you just like to argue. If the OP had posted that the USPS will NOT insure against damage you would have taken the opposite side and then posted the terms of service...
And no, I would never trust you or do business with you.
Philippians 4:4-7
PCGS holder is very easy to get damaged on the edge. I always receive damaged edge holder from auction houses. I usually let it go. Too much trouble to try to get reimbursed for it
But you somehow have insight insight into the USPS damage claim resolution department? You're an expert when you want to be, and an innocent bystander otherwise.
Even though I happen to have first hand experience that damage claims absent total mangling of external packaging are denied due to inadequate protection? Great! You don't need first hand experience to actually know what you are talking about, because you can read and know for a fact that what any large organization says they are going to do, particularly a government monopoly, is ALWAYS what they do. Like the US Mint, for example. 🤣
Now you've hit a new low as well.
Yikes, when a person finds themselves in a hole, the first thing they should do is stop digging.
Philippians 4:4-7
Yes. Yikes. I'll take it under advisement, even though you've already posted
so I'm not sure what you think you're adding here. But please feel free to keep piling on. Maybe at some point I'll feel like I have been put in my place, or sufficiently beaten into submission to the point where I'll give you what you want. Maybe.
In the meantime, I'm sticking to my guns, humbled in the knowledge that I'll never get to do business with you.
nb4thelock
Yeah. I'm not sure what the fuss is about, considering it's a $25 claim that isn't being filed.
Some folks just NEED to try to put me in my place. Because, theoretically, the claim could not only be filed, but, depending on the alignment of the moon and the stars, could even possibly be paid.
Because @jmlanzaf once successfully filed a claim on a music box, and even though I have seen multiple claims denied because the package was deemed to have not been adequately secured. Because items placed for delivery with the USPS and not hand held from point to point, and there are no guarantees with respect to damage if items are not properly protected.
No matter what people quote from their T&Cs. Pointing to what they say is one thing. Documenting a claim to their satisfaction, and getting them to write a check, is something else entirely. As though the people wagging their fingers at me don't already know this.
A guy who works for a company that ships hundreds or thousands of slabs a week, but doesn't "work in the shipping department or have anything to with or knowledge of shipping claims and their outcomes" has to weigh in, with no firsthand knowledge. Because it's an opportunity to put me in my place. Understood.