At a minimum Guy should show his "Mark" the check and amount he paid the doctor for the "consigned" coin, and refund the profit while Mark should give Guy a waver against any action. If I were Guy I certainly would have no intention of profiting off an unsaleable doctored coin, even if sold in good faith. Then Mark should sue the coin doctor in every state he sets up shop trying to cost him as much in legal fee as possible, even though he has no case to speak of. Or he could call my cousin Luigi to handle the matter.
Coin gets holder by someone with bigger pull into a PCGS MS63 holder and will be sold to the unaware at an upcoming auction....maybe Mr. E is trying to tell us something?
<< <i>Mark is thrilled because he thinks it's a 65 worth 100K. >>
It doesn't sound like there are any good guys in this story. One guy is selling a whizzed coin raw, another is trying to turn 25K into 30K by selling the whizzed coin on consignment, the third is trying to turn 30K into 100K based on his imagined grading abilities. It's all a huge racket.
If you sold this same coin to a collector for 30K, and if you had already paid the consignor and had no recourse, how long a return privilege would you allow the collector?
I, as do all members of the PNG, offer a no questions fourteen day return privilege. Beyond that, I would try to allow a collector some latitude, perhaps taking the coin back in trade, towards another coin. I would not feel an obligation to refund his money, after the 14 days.
I would feel no obligation to refund money to a dealer in any circumstance, as I would not knowingly sell a whizzed coin, without disclosing the fact. I also may offer to take the coin back in trade.
I would make an offer to purchase the coin, at any time.
I just responded to a two year old thread, as well, that I had responded to before. At least my answers are not too different.
PNG member, numismatic dealer since 1965. Operates a retail store, also has exhibited at over 1000 shows. I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
1. Yes, a fair amount of time has passed and the coin has been removed from the original holder. I'm a little uncertain about the second part. In the first chapter Guy was not offering the coin to Mark but asking for an opinion. Mark talked him into selling him the coin. If Guy KNEW it was whizzed, what kind of second opinion would he have been seeking? Possibly seeing if a knowledgeable expert would notice the whizzing and if not then the client he had planned for it wouldn't? If he knew it was whizzed then it would depend on exactly how it was represented to Mark. If it was represented as whizzed (which it didn't seem to be in Chapter one) then Guy has acted ethically and there definitely would be no reason to offer a refund. If it was deliberatly concealed that it was whizzed then even though I do not feel at a refund SHOULD be made, it it would still be the ethical thing to do to at least give a partial refund.
2 Yes, Doc was not a party to the transaction between Guy and Mark. (I am assuming you meant a refund to Mark since he was the only person mentioned as having approached Doc.) No, it doesn't matter because again the transaction is between Guy and Mark, Doc is not a party to it.
3. Not really. But I would say Guy acted unethically if he knowingly did not reveal the whizzing to a non-professional collector.
Comments
<< <i>Dang, I just got suckered into responding to a two year old thread. >>
Why should the age of the thread matter? The story itself dates back to 1989, and the issues have not changed have they?
CG
<< <i>Mark is thrilled because he thinks it's a 65 worth 100K. >>
It doesn't sound like there are any good guys in this story. One guy is selling a whizzed coin raw, another is trying to turn 25K into 30K by selling the whizzed coin on consignment, the third is trying to turn 30K into 100K based on his imagined grading abilities. It's all a huge racket.
I, as do all members of the PNG, offer a no questions fourteen day return privilege. Beyond that, I would try to allow a collector some latitude, perhaps taking the coin back in trade, towards another coin. I would not feel an obligation to refund his money, after the 14 days.
I would feel no obligation to refund money to a dealer in any circumstance, as I would not knowingly sell a whizzed coin, without disclosing the fact. I also may offer to take the coin back in trade.
I would make an offer to purchase the coin, at any time.
I just responded to a two year old thread, as well, that I had responded to before. At least my answers are not too different.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
2 Yes, Doc was not a party to the transaction between Guy and Mark. (I am assuming you meant a refund to Mark since he was the only person mentioned as having approached Doc.) No, it doesn't matter because again the transaction is between Guy and Mark, Doc is not a party to it.
3. Not really. But I would say Guy acted unethically if he knowingly did not reveal the whizzing to a non-professional collector.
Yes if there was no return policy engaged before the transaction was completed
Does it matter if Guy knew that the coin was whizzed?
It only matters as to whether I think he is a dirtbag not whehter he has to give a refund.
Was Doc within his rights refusing to give a refund?
Yes
Does it matter if Doc knew that the coin was whizzed?
It only matters as to whether I think he is a dirtbag not whehter he has to give a refund.
If Mark was a collector, not a dealer, would your answers be any different?
No, but I would have some sympathy for him.
CoinPeople.com || CoinWiki.com || NumisLinks.com