<< <i>Yes, these creatures are innocent until proven quilty. These are some claims:
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting? >>
Here is some more!! 1926-D 25C, originally submitted to PCGS on March 23, 2001 through Liberty Coins. Re-purchased in September 23, 2008 under PCGS Guarantee. Liverty’s head artificially enhanced.
1810 $10 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on November 29, 2006 through Defendant Steinberg. Re-purchased in June 2009 for $1800 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1881 $2.5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman, held by PCGS pending trial in this action. Lines on coin’s surface lasered off.
1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
1918-D Mecury 10C, orginially submitted to PCGS on May 17, 2001 by Defendant Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in April 27, 2010 for $90,000 under PCGS Guarantee. Crossbands on dime had been rebuilt.
1833 Bust 50C, originally submitted on April 8, 2004 by Superior Galleries. Re-purchased in June 22, 2008 for $8,500 under PCGS Guarantee.
1928-D Standing Liberty 25C, originally submitted on May 30, 2001 by Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in March 2005 for $4,650 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s Head was rebuilt to appear “full”.
1904 $20 gold piece, originally submitted April 1998 by Krill. Re-purchased December 2007 for $1,250 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance applied.
1926-D Standing Liberty 25c originally submitted in July 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in June 2007 for $7,500 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s head rebuilt.
1919-S Mercury dim originally submitted on August 13, 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in September 2009 for $4,887. Crossbans on dime had been rebuilt.
1918-S quarter orginally submitted in April 2001 by Dan Ratner. Re-purchased in February 2007 for $3500. Liberty’s heat rebuilt. >>
Can't see the lawsuit sticking. If changing the surface of a coin were a crime, NCS would have been shut down long ago. Will also have to prove that submitter of coin is the person who altered the coin. I had a bunch of coins purchased from hsturn on ebay body bagged. Hope I'm not guilty of anything other than stupidity.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
This counter-attack has been building for awhile. Kudos to John Albanese, Laura and others who got the big ball rolling here, and congrats to PCGS for coming up with the technology to get the goods on these people.
So, if I submit a coin to PCGS and it has been doctored in some way by someone else (unknowing to me) PCGS could not only refuse to grade it they could also file a Lawsuit again me?
ED .....................................................
<< <i>Can't see the lawsuit sticking. If changing the surface of a coin were a crime, NCS would have been shut down long ago. Will also have to prove that submitter of coin is the person who altered the coin. I had a bunch of coins purchased from hsturn on ebay body bagged. Hope I'm not guilty of anything other than stupidity. >>
The premise of the lawsuit isn't what NCS does. NCS is mostly responsible for removing surface contaminants in an effort to preserve coins. Do they go overboard and strip coins too much sometimes? You bet, but PCGS slabs those coins, and they aren't suing anyone for sending in a cleaned coin. If for no other reason, that would be an impossible line to draw (cleaned vs. dipped and acceptable).
The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH).
<< <i>So, if I submit a coin to PCGS and it has been doctored in some way by someone else (unknowing to me) PCGS could not only refuse to grade it they could also file a Lawsuit again me? >>
Sounds like that's exactly what they did. Will be interesting to learn how these guys were singled out. Must have been a pretty good pattern of "coin abuse" with their submissions.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
<< <i>So, if I submit a coin to PCGS and it has been doctored in some way by someone else (unknowing to me) PCGS could not only refuse to grade it they could also file a Lawsuit again me? >>
Or how about if you use a commercially available product like MS 70 (Indian cent fame)? Deller's Darkener? Mineral oil?
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble... >>
I do know that PCGS is OK with PVC removal, because they do it. I sent an 1895-O Morgan to them in a PCGS slab that had light PVC coating the entire reverse, and they returned it in a new slab with the PVC removed. I can't find it now, but I actually posted the problem in one of the David Hall Q&A threads, and he told me to return it and they'd take care of it.
I think there's a big difference between removing PVC or verdegris from a coin and altering it's basic appearance to make it something it never was (i.e., full bands on a Mercury Dime, FH on a SLQ, etc.)
You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
When coins are submitted, does the submitter sign a statement stating the coins haven't been messed with? If not, I believe this lawsuit has no merit.
I believe the language of the PCGS Dealer Agreement should be sufficient to nail a doctor or a doctor's accomplice, should PCGS choose to do so. (In fact, the dealer agreement creates so much potential liability for the dealer that I almost refused to sign it. But ultimately I signed it, because I was reasonably confident that PCGS would not target me.)
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I believe I have developed a newfound respect for this fine company. Glad that war has been declared on these scoundrels that are a scourge on our hobby.
KUDOS PCGS ! ! !
HH
Need the following OBW rolls to complete my 46-64 Roosevelt roll set: 1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S. Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble... >>
I do know that PCGS is OK with PVC removal, because they do it. I sent an 1895-O Morgan to them in a PCGS slab that had light PVC coating the entire reverse, and they returned it in a new slab with the PVC removed. I can't find it now, but I actually posted the problem in one of the David Hall Q&A threads, and he told me to return it and they'd take care of it.
I think there's a big difference between removing PVC or verdegris from a coin and altering it's basic appearance to make it something it never was (i.e., full bands on a Mercury Dime, FH on a SLQ, etc.) >>
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble... >>
Define acceptable. PCGS is in the coin grading business, they are not a law enforcement agency. You pay them to certify and grade your coin. If they find reason that they cannot do so, they keep your money and return your coin. Sounds like a lot of collectors/submittors are getting all worked up over this. It's obvious that PCGS saw a definite pattern with a few submittors and are pursuing shutting them down. PCGS should be commended for this as they are protecting us as well as themselves (their buyback guarantee should a graded coin later be found to be "doctored"). Any compensation, if awarded, should be class action for the collectors and buyers the doctors rip off.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
With all of the counterfeit coins being offered for sale in the market these days, this part of the story could be a major differentiator for PCGS going forward, especially in the eyes of new collectors....<<< The simultaneous alloy determination will further aid in the detection of counterfeits as an additional benefit.>>>
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble... >>
Define acceptable. PCGS is in the coin grading business, they are not a law enforcement agency. You pay them to certify and grade your coin. If they find reason that they cannot do so, they keep your money and return your coin. Sounds like a lot of collectors/submittors are getting all worked up over this. It's obvious that PCGS saw a definite pattern with a few submittors and are pursuing shutting them down. PCGS should be commended for this as they are protecting us as well as themselves (their buyback guarantee should a graded coin later be found to be "doctored"). Any compensation, if awarded, should be class action for the collectors and buyers the doctors rip off. >>
I hear ya, but it is the "If they find reason that they cannot do so"... that I am interested in. Don't forget the "PCGS Coin Sniffer™" Will it sniff out traces of MS 70 ?
Counselor Vartarian certainly has his work cut out for him!
I think this action has a significantly better chance of success than Mayor Daley's gun ban in Chicago has of surviving the Supreme Court challenge.
On another note, it seems that for this case at least, the focus of the accusations is on movers of metal and adders of foreign substances, as opposed to the AT docs. There is a conspicuous absence of the names of some quite well known color artists.
"Wars are really ugly! They're dirty and they're cold. I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole." Mary
I recall a History Channel show on the US Mint where an official stated that the owner of a coin is free to do whatever he wishes to the coin. Laws are not broken until it is passed off as something that it is not.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
And how the heck do you artificially rebuild Liberty's head?
There are a number of ways to do it. If the head is already close to FH, then the best approach would probably be to hand carve the missing details. But if the head is flat, the easiest way might be to cast a full head and then glue it to the coin.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
That exactly my point- the suit appears to things that directly involve adding, re-cutting, re-shaping, lasering or something else with the metal- It does not include coloring- I feel most of us... Maybe I wrong- Believe that when a coin has been doctored it has been AT... That is why I am saying that the suit will help a bit but it does not address the cooking, baking, or chemical coloring of coins... Which is a huge plague and just as costly- Just that that cost is more directly in line with the collectors rather than CU
I would not look for to many law suits to be filed but sounds good.The part that I lose confidence in is when they compare there machine to the sniffers at the airport that don't work. Does this mean that PCGS can do away with genuine code 91?? I have a couple of them that I would like to have there machine take a look at..
Give the laziest man the toughest job and he will find the easiest way to get it done.
Interesting set of events...this was bound to come to a head, just wonder why it took so long, maybe our host was collecting substantial evidence for the court room drama.
What a great early Christmas present to the collecting community, from PCGS.
With all the concern about whether the charges will stick, I think the important point is, for better or worse, alleged doctors have been publically exposed.
That exactly my point- the suit appears to things that directly involve adding, re-cutting, re-shaping, lasering or something else with the metal- It does not include coloring- I feel most of us... Maybe I wrong- Believe that when a coin has been doctored it has been AT... That is why I am saying that the suit will help a bit but it does not address the cooking, baking, or chemical coloring of coins... Which is a huge plague and just as costly- Just that that cost is more directly in line with the collectors rather than CU >>
Part of the strategy here may be to try to "rifle shot" the complaint to a single type of abuse. Trying to get a judge and jury to understand adding metal and then talking about altering color would involve two different technical experts, arguments, theories, etc. By keeping the complaint simple and focused on a single issue could be a stronger way to make the point with non-coin judges and juries.
But hey, I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
==Looking for pre WW2 Commems in PCGS Rattler holders, 1851-O Three Cent Silvers in all grades
Successful, problem free and pleasant transactions with: illini420, coinguy1, weather11am,wayneherndon,wondercoin,Topdollarpaid,Julian, bishdigg,seateddime, peicesofme,ajia,CoinRaritiesOnline,savoyspecial,Boom, TorinoCobra71, ModernCoinMart, WTCG, slinc, Patches, Gerard, pocketpiececommems, BigJohnD, RickMilauskas, mirabella, Smittys, LeeG, TomB, DeusExMachina, tydye
<< <i>What a great early Christmas present to the collecting community, from PCGS.
With all the concern about whether the charges will stick, I think the important point is, for better or worse, alleged doctors have been publically exposed. >>
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation. >>
According to the complaint, PCGS defined "doctoring" in their dealer membership agreement. And by signing the agreement, dealers agree not to engage in those forms of doctoring or knowingly submit "doctored" coins.
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation. >>
According to the complaint, PCGS defined "doctoring" in their dealer membership agreement. And by signing the agreement, dealers agree not to engage in those forms of doctoring or knowingly submit "doctored" coins. >>
As a non-dealer member of PCGS is this something I would not have seen? I have submitted bulk orders, is their anything in that agreement?
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
I hope this lawsuit helps define what is doctoring versus alteration. For example, dipping is altering the coin's surface, which is acceptable in almost all circles of numismatics. Doctoring is also alteration of the coins surface, but with deception in mind. It would be a good thing to have a definitive understanding of these practices.
Not to be a nay-sayer, but if PCGS does NOT win this lawsuit, it will basically give free rein to ALL of the doctors out there. For all of our sakes, we'd better hope they win...
I think it's easier for them to prove that metal has been moved on a coin than to distinguish a good AT job from a NT coin. I'm not sure of the specifics, as it's a trade secret, but I imagine the TPGs pay special attention to coins with a retail value over a certain dollar amount.
The idea of adding details to an almost FH SLQ is scary. I've seen many of these coins slabbed as FH as is. Sometimes, all one would have to do is add a slit for the ear hole.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
PCGS is not going to go after people who sent in collector submissions. I am pretty sure they are going to show that each named defendant acted in cohorts with another to submit coins back and forth for profit at the expense of PCGS. A direct violation of the documents they signed when they became PCGS authorized dealers. Seems pretty open and shut if they pursue the case under contract law.-------------------BigE
BTW, wonder why the person who posted the massive retooling of his Gobrect dollar that didn't even get a genuine holder hasn't piped in. No wonders now why it didn't
This is good news, but I can see a class action suit from the accused so I hope PCGS has all their information in order. Because of their accusations of these people and companies, they have been harmed financially. They must prove to a jury that what they did was wrong. Now tell a layman that you paid $55.00 for someone's opinion to grade a penny. The company then states it is a real penny. The penny can't be graded because PCGS can't tell if it is NT or AT. Takes their money and returns a un graded coin. PCGS this could be the end of you if you fail ...
Very interesting. The complaint is quite detailed as to who submitted coins on behalf of whom. The RICO is quite interesting. Treble damages for the buyback amounts on the civil complaint, and very possibly future criminal racketeering chages based upon various possible frauds - State and Federal.
I can't imagine that a public company like PCGS would list named defendants unless their case was extremely strong - I am guessing that they have a cooperating co-conspirator, or several.
Can't wait to see the John Does eventually named. Given the size of the hammer that it appears PCGS is wielding, I suspect that others will provide information in exchange for not being named/sued/arrested.
<< <i>If you ask me, this is bigger than the Big One! Get those coin doctors off the streets. >>
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Also won the PNG's Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, these creatures are innocent until proven quilty. These are some claims:
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting? >>
Here is some more!!
1926-D 25C, originally submitted to PCGS on March 23, 2001 through Liberty Coins. Re-purchased in September 23, 2008 under PCGS Guarantee. Liverty’s head artificially enhanced.
1810 $10 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on November 29, 2006 through Defendant Steinberg. Re-purchased in June 2009 for $1800 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1881 $2.5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman, held by PCGS pending trial in this action. Lines on coin’s surface lasered off.
1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
1918-D Mecury 10C, orginially submitted to PCGS on May 17, 2001 by Defendant Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in April 27, 2010 for $90,000 under PCGS Guarantee. Crossbands on dime had been rebuilt.
1833 Bust 50C, originally submitted on April 8, 2004 by Superior Galleries. Re-purchased in June 22, 2008 for $8,500 under PCGS Guarantee.
1928-D Standing Liberty 25C, originally submitted on May 30, 2001 by Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in March 2005 for $4,650 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s Head was rebuilt to appear “full”.
1904 $20 gold piece, originally submitted April 1998 by Krill. Re-purchased December 2007 for $1,250 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance applied.
1926-D Standing Liberty 25c originally submitted in July 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in June 2007 for $7,500 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s head rebuilt.
1919-S Mercury dim originally submitted on August 13, 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in September 2009 for $4,887. Crossbans on dime had been rebuilt.
1918-S quarter orginally submitted in April 2001 by Dan Ratner. Re-purchased in February 2007 for $3500. Liberty’s heat rebuilt. >>
Glad I collect Kennedy half dollars
They are too modern for people to mess with!
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
This counter-attack has been building for awhile. Kudos to John Albanese, Laura and others who got the big ball rolling here, and congrats to PCGS for coming up with the technology to get the goods on these people.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
.....................................................
<< <i>Can't see the lawsuit sticking. If changing the surface of a coin were a crime, NCS would have been shut down long ago. Will also have to prove that submitter of coin is the person who altered the coin. I had a bunch of coins purchased from hsturn on ebay body bagged. Hope I'm not guilty of anything other than stupidity. >>
The premise of the lawsuit isn't what NCS does. NCS is mostly responsible for removing surface contaminants in an effort to preserve coins. Do they go overboard and strip coins too much sometimes? You bet, but PCGS slabs those coins, and they aren't suing anyone for sending in a cleaned coin. If for no other reason, that would be an impossible line to draw (cleaned vs. dipped and acceptable).
The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH).
<< <i>So, if I submit a coin to PCGS and it has been doctored in some way by someone else (unknowing to me) PCGS could not only refuse to grade it they could also file a Lawsuit again me? >>
Sounds like that's exactly what they did. Will be interesting to learn how these guys were singled out. Must have been a pretty good pattern of "coin abuse" with their submissions.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
<< <i>So, if I submit a coin to PCGS and it has been doctored in some way by someone else (unknowing to me) PCGS could not only refuse to grade it they could also file a Lawsuit again me? >>
Or how about if you use a commercially available product like MS 70 (Indian cent fame)?
Deller's Darkener?
Mineral oil?
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
I do know that PCGS is OK with PVC removal, because they do it. I sent an 1895-O Morgan to them in a PCGS slab that had light PVC coating the entire reverse, and they returned it in a new slab with the PVC removed. I can't find it now, but I actually posted the problem in one of the David Hall Q&A threads, and he told me to return it and they'd take care of it.
I think there's a big difference between removing PVC or verdegris from a coin and altering it's basic appearance to make it something it never was (i.e., full bands on a Mercury Dime, FH on a SLQ, etc.)
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
I believe the language of the PCGS Dealer Agreement should be sufficient to nail a doctor or a doctor's accomplice, should PCGS choose to do so. (In fact, the dealer agreement creates so much potential liability for the dealer that I almost refused to sign it. But ultimately I signed it, because I was reasonably confident that PCGS would not target me.)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Glad that war has been declared on these scoundrels that are a scourge on our hobby.
KUDOS PCGS ! ! !
HH
1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S.
Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
<< <i>
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
I do know that PCGS is OK with PVC removal, because they do it. I sent an 1895-O Morgan to them in a PCGS slab that had light PVC coating the entire reverse, and they returned it in a new slab with the PVC removed. I can't find it now, but I actually posted the problem in one of the David Hall Q&A threads, and he told me to return it and they'd take care of it.
I think there's a big difference between removing PVC or verdegris from a coin and altering it's basic appearance to make it something it never was (i.e., full bands on a Mercury Dime, FH on a SLQ, etc.) >>
I agree.
Thanks, good response.
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
Define acceptable. PCGS is in the coin grading business, they are not a law enforcement agency. You pay them to certify and grade your coin. If they find reason that they cannot do so, they keep your money and return your coin. Sounds like a lot of collectors/submittors are getting all worked up over this. It's obvious that PCGS saw a definite pattern with a few submittors and are pursuing shutting them down. PCGS should be commended for this as they are protecting us as well as themselves (their buyback guarantee should a graded coin later be found to be "doctored"). Any compensation, if awarded, should be class action for the collectors and buyers the doctors rip off.
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
<< <i>
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
Define acceptable. PCGS is in the coin grading business, they are not a law enforcement agency. You pay them to certify and grade your coin. If they find reason that they cannot do so, they keep your money and return your coin. Sounds like a lot of collectors/submittors are getting all worked up over this. It's obvious that PCGS saw a definite pattern with a few submittors and are pursuing shutting them down. PCGS should be commended for this as they are protecting us as well as themselves (their buyback guarantee should a graded coin later be found to be "doctored"). Any compensation, if awarded, should be class action for the collectors and buyers the doctors rip off. >>
I hear ya, but it is the "If they find reason that they cannot do so"... that I am interested in.
Don't forget the "PCGS Coin Sniffer™"
Will it sniff out traces of MS 70 ?
I think this action has a significantly better chance of success than Mayor Daley's gun ban in Chicago has of surviving the Supreme Court challenge.
On another note, it seems that for this case at least, the focus of the accusations is on movers of metal and adders of foreign substances, as opposed to the AT docs. There is a conspicuous absence of the names of some quite well known color artists.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
There are a number of ways to do it. If the head is already close to FH, then the best approach would probably be to hand carve the missing details. But if the head is flat, the easiest way might be to cast a full head and then glue it to the coin.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
That exactly my point- the suit appears to things that directly involve adding, re-cutting, re-shaping, lasering or something else with the metal- It does not include coloring- I feel most of us... Maybe I wrong- Believe that when a coin has been doctored it has been AT... That is why I am saying that the suit will help a bit but it does not address the cooking, baking, or chemical coloring of coins... Which is a huge plague and just as costly- Just that that cost is more directly in line with the collectors rather than CU
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
sounds good.The part that I lose confidence in is when they compare there machine to the sniffers at the airport that don't work.
Does this mean that PCGS can do away with genuine code 91??
I have a couple of them that I would like to have there machine
take a look at..
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
With all the concern about whether the charges will stick, I think the important point is, for better or worse, alleged doctors have been publically exposed.
<< <i>Mark,
That exactly my point- the suit appears to things that directly involve adding, re-cutting, re-shaping, lasering or something else with the metal- It does not include coloring- I feel most of us... Maybe I wrong- Believe that when a coin has been doctored it has been AT... That is why I am saying that the suit will help a bit but it does not address the cooking, baking, or chemical coloring of coins... Which is a huge plague and just as costly- Just that that cost is more directly in line with the collectors rather than CU >>
Part of the strategy here may be to try to "rifle shot" the complaint to a single type of abuse. Trying to get a judge and jury to understand adding metal and then talking about altering color would involve two different technical experts, arguments, theories, etc. By keeping the complaint simple and focused on a single issue could be a stronger way to make the point with non-coin judges and juries.
But hey, I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
==Looking for pre WW2 Commems in PCGS Rattler holders, 1851-O Three Cent Silvers in all grades
Successful, problem free and pleasant transactions with: illini420, coinguy1, weather11am,wayneherndon,wondercoin,Topdollarpaid,Julian, bishdigg,seateddime, peicesofme,ajia,CoinRaritiesOnline,savoyspecial,Boom, TorinoCobra71, ModernCoinMart, WTCG, slinc, Patches, Gerard, pocketpiececommems, BigJohnD, RickMilauskas, mirabella, Smittys, LeeG, TomB, DeusExMachina, tydye
Best hope PCGS wins, otherwise countercliaims could be interesting as well.
RR
Silvano DiGenova possesses a remarkable talent - he can turn one man's small change into another man's fortune
http://reviews.ebay.com/A-Superior-Talent_W0QQugidZ10000000000021676
<< <i>What a great early Christmas present to the collecting community, from PCGS.
With all the concern about whether the charges will stick, I think the important point is, for better or worse, alleged doctors have been publically exposed. >>
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
<< <i>
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation. >>
According to the complaint, PCGS defined "doctoring" in their dealer membership agreement. And by signing the agreement, dealers agree not to engage in those forms of doctoring or knowingly submit "doctored" coins.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> The lawsuit is against those who have done far worse doctoring, much of which seems to involve physically altering the surfaces to make the coin better than it is to achieve a huge boost in value (make a merc FB or an SLQ FH). >>
So, who defines "worse doctoring" and who draws the line? PCGS? I don't think you'll see the courts draw the line on this one. That's why I think the lawsuits won't stick.
PCGS draws their line with "grade" or "no grade." That's how I believe things will continue to be when the courts are through with this. The lawsuit might be more to instill fear among the POS coin doctors than to receive actual compensation. >>
According to the complaint, PCGS defined "doctoring" in their dealer membership agreement. And by signing the agreement, dealers agree not to engage in those forms of doctoring or knowingly submit "doctored" coins. >>
As a non-dealer member of PCGS is this something I would not have seen? I have submitted bulk orders, is their anything in that agreement?
Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. - Bastiat
As far as the lawsuit. WOW.
TRUTH
Unfortunately, I am not at all surprised that there are PNG members named in the lawsuit.
Will PNG suspend the membership of dealers named in this lawsuit?
So, PNG, as a collector, I am watching. How will PNG respond?
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
The idea of adding details to an almost FH SLQ is scary. I've seen many of these coins slabbed as FH as is. Sometimes, all one would have to do is add a slit for the ear hole.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
BTW, wonder why the person who posted the massive retooling of his Gobrect dollar that didn't even get a genuine holder hasn't piped in. No wonders now why it didn't
I'm sure as this issue presses on the serious AT guys are doomed too.
Even if not, they are sitting home pooping AT by reading the complaint!
I feel so much better about collecting and the PCGS product.
The impacts will ripple through the Numismatic Community, in a negative way I fear.
article
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
I can't imagine that a public company like PCGS would list named defendants unless their case was extremely strong - I am guessing that they have a cooperating co-conspirator, or several.
Can't wait to see the John Does eventually named. Given the size of the hammer that it appears PCGS is wielding, I suspect that others will provide information in exchange for not being named/sued/arrested.
merse
<< <i>If you ask me, this is bigger than the Big One! Get those coin doctors off the streets. >>
I had wondered just how a coin that had passed thru the PCGS grading process would suddenly become suspect -
and I too think PCGS has a witness or two that can spill the beans in exchange for immunity
and so they do not have to return some coins submitted that have been doctored and they are holding for evidence
and asking for a jury trail ?
this seems like good news - can the judge/jury send people to jail if convicted or just big fines for damages?
should be as interesting as the 1933 saints casee