Had an Unfortunate Disagreement with a Mint Representative On the Phone Yesterday
jfriedm56
Posts: 3,102 ✭✭✭✭✭
So the Mint’s Loyalty Program states that after 3 Mint products have been purchased and shipped, and you meet the requirements for the loyalty program, your remaining purchases for the year will include free shipping. Savings of now $9.95 for each shipment.
I’ve now purchased 5 shipments and was still charged the shipping cost. I called last Monday and was assured by a rep. that these would be reversed once the 5th order was shipped. Call back when number 5 is shipped and they deduct the 2 orders of $9.95.
Long story short is the 5th order shipped and wanted to see if that the shipping charges were reversed. The new representative tells me that because I ordered these before the 3rd order shipped, they were ineligible for free shipping.
We went around and around for 10 or 15 minutes and I finally said to her she didn’t know her own policy and I needed to speak to a manager. Well that was an on hold experience for 20 minutes (deliberately) and finally talked to a supervisor who clearly knew the policy.
Everything was cleared up and he assured me that all charges would be reversed and future shipping costs would be $0. And they will have a meeting with their representatives to clear up any confusion on their part.
Thanks for reading this and letting me vent a bit of my frustration.
Anyone else have a difficult experience dealing with a Mint employee?
Zack.
Comments
Good job Zack.
Fight the power!
The value of this hobby is the hobby, not the value.
Yes, I recently went through a nightmare of an experience - they used to be much more competent. I think they've been Doged!
I've seen the mint employees at ANA shows and the ones I saw looked like they didn't like their work nor were interested in friendly customer service. Probably a stressful job.
But they all got a free July 4th Privy quarter!
they are probably tired. they have a lot to do.
fyi. they are real government employees. the phone reps are contractors
if there was an exception made
those sales counter people aren't permitted to buy HHL items. something like where they were giving a quarter for buying a hhl item would mean they were shut out.
or perhaps they can't buy any. see them in pittsburgh? ask
Looks like we got a little sidetracked. Anyone else have a similar experience that I had?
Yes, I had a similar experience and was told the same, that since mine were not shipped yet they did not count toward the 3 purchase total. I had 9 orders that should have been free.
Mine was not reversed. If yours was you are fortunate.
i didn't have a mint rep problem like that. the closest was when, like you, i was charged shipping when I shouldn't have
They were wrong. Their policy clearly states that after 3 orders are shipped and you are enrolled in their loyalty program, all future orders are with free shipping. Plain and simple.
and I even got a welcome email from the mint
" that since mine were not shipped yet they did not count toward the 3 purchase total. "
The key is that mine were "not shipped yet".
The rep I dealt with said the same thing. Because I had purchased more coins before the 3rd order had shipped she told me I was ineligible for free shipping. After talking with her supervisor, he told me she was wrong about the policy. He said,” Every order includes free shipping once the 3rd order ships.”
You needed to talk to a supervisor/ manager. Just read the 4 bullets on the Mint’s website under Loyalty Program.
Zack.
You were lucky. The supervisor was wrong.
Here is what the website says. It is pretty clear:
Place three orders within the calendar year to receive free budget shipping. **Once all three orders have shipped, the discount will apply to all future orders **placed in the same year and shipped within the U.S.
But he said they weren't shipped
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
My 3rd purchase hadn’t shipped when I ordered 2 more orders. Once the 3rd shipped, the 2 new orders had the shipping charges reversed. What don’t you get.
4 bullets from the United States Mint web site.
The supervisor was not wrong. You are mistaken.
The person that YOU responded to said that their orders hadn't shipped. Since they hadn't shipped, the discount shouldn't have applied.
If you parse the Mint policy as it is written, it isn't SHIPMENTS after the 3rd. It's ORDERS after the 3RD shipment. AS WRITTEN, that means if I placed 9 orders on January 1st and one shipped every day from the 2nd to the 10th, they should ALL be subject to shipping charges. Only orders placed after the 4th, the day the 3rd order shipped, would be subject to the loyalty program.
Now, of course, the Mint could interpret it more liberally. But if you take it literally as written, if you placed 100 orders on January 1st, they should all be subject to shipping charges.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Wow. Just wow. Reported.
It SAYS no shipping charges on FUTURE ORDERS after the 3rd SHIPMENT, not on SHIPMENTS after the 3rd order. So, again, they can interpret it more liberally, but as written it says they won't apply shipping charges to new (future) ORDERS not shipments.
I'm not sure how to explain it more simply.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Reported.
I just read the words as written. Let's ask ourselves:
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Per ChatGPT 5.6
Prompt: What is the literal reading of the following text: "Once all three orders have shipped, the discount will apply to all future orders..." Would the discount apply to a 4th order placed before the third order was shipped, if the 4thv order shipped after the 3rd order?
Response:
On a literal reading, probably no.
The key phrase is “all future orders.” Grammatically, “future” is measured from the point established by “Once all three orders have shipped.” That suggests orders that come into existence—i.e., are placed—after the third order has shipped.
So if:
then Order 4 would not ordinarily count as a “future order.” It was already an existing order when the triggering condition occurred.
If the intended rule were based on shipment timing, clearer wording would be something like: “Once all three orders have shipped, the discount will apply to all orders shipped thereafter.”
The current wording points more naturally to when the order is placed, not when it ships.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Reported.
I've not made one ad hominem remark, despite your insults. I've simply discussed the text.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Ok. I would definitely call as much attention as possible to this thread.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Thanks. But best to just duck at this point. No need to catch a stray.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
jfriedm56 Posts: 3,106 ✭✭✭✭✭ August 15, 2026 4:24PM
Like the Rolling Stones “Thick as a Brick “. You definitely make yourself look and sound stupid.
Can I report to PCGS moderator about your stupidity and harassment? Keep it up cause it’s going to happen
What’s gotten into you?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If you complain loudly enough, some businesses will give you what you're whining about even if it's not in alignment with their terms in order to get you to go away.
Most everybody knows this.
Source: YouTube https://share.google/eq4ILD5SJxsH6e7lj
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.