Beware Carterscards2006
 

This is simply a headsup to anyone dealing with carterscards2006 on ebay-- a seller which has sold tens of thousands of dollars worth of cards this month alone. They state that they will not accept returns. Make of that what you will and for what its worth, their descriptions do not state that the card is sold as is.

I paid $1025 for this card:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...K%3AMEWNX%3AIT

SGC has determined that the card is trimmed. I requested a refund from seller, and later had to proceed through ebay. Seller has contested my claim for buyer protection through paypal, which stated that card is not as described, and that it is worth about 10% or less of what was paid since it is altered. Card also was likely not "very early submission to GAI", as represented.

Seller brags about customer service, but has not even had the guts to respond to my request for refund before paypal got involved, nor since. He has just asked paypal to make a decision.

He will get a negative from me, regardless of outcome, for his utter lack of response or explanation. I will bitch about him here as long as I wish as well. I will sue him if I do not get a refund, and he can come to Arizona to defend. Yes I am aware that he said no refunds--I don't care. The card is altered, and he can stand on his reputation if he chooses, but he should make it right. I hope he does defend here, as I believe there is a chance he knew or should have known of the card's alteration, and if so, I will make it that much worse for him.

Not really looking for sympathy here and may not get any--just wanted to vent. Also thought you'd like to know a little about this seller if you were thinking of bidding on his auctions. BTW, he was also the seller of the T222 Alexander that is the subject of a recent thread.

Todd,I'm certainly not trying to be a pain in the a** or anything but the item stated "No returns" which essentially neans AS IS. I'm not 100% sure were I in his position and had I been the seller of this card if I'd be willing to issue a refund. You did pay a decent amount for the card and I'd definitely try to resubmit as it appears to measure correctly to me (and obviously to you as well when you bid on it). I've had numerous positive transaction with both you and the ebay seller in the past.

-Rhett

I don't really see where the seller is in the wrong. You bought a M101-5 Stengel graded a GAI 7.5 and that's what you got. One company says it is trimmed, one says it is not. I tend to side with SGC, but who really knows?

If I were the seller in this case, I would refund your money because it is the right thing to do. However, the seller is not obligated to do so if they so choose because he delivered exactly what you bought and a SNAD does not apply in this case.

Good luck!

draw your own conclusions
 

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAP...ab=AllFeedback


AND

Bidder Information
Bidder: s***n( 6 )
Feedback: 100%Positive
Item description: Item Title: 1914 T222 Fatima GROVER ALEXANDER Graded PSA 5 EX
Bids on this item: 2
30-Day Summary
Total bids: 131
Items bid on: 92
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 97%
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 0

Hope it works out for you Todd, seller should respond and refund since you are not happy and have reason not to be but obviously they are not. Since they won't hopefully paypal will for you. I don't understand how sellers feel they can force a customer to keep something they are completely unhappy with it is such good business !!

Not really--- I got a m101-4 Stengel.

Thanks Peter--so it looks like there may be a shiller here too. 97% of his bids on nearly 100 items are on this guy's auctions, hmmmmmm.

Todd, just out of curiosity, why do you suspect it might not be an early GAI graded card?

I don't know anything about this particular issue, so I looked it up. I see what you're talking about. The cards look very similar, but are indeed different. Therefore, I believe you do have a case for a SNAD since you did not get the card that was listed in the title/description. Good luck!

The bottom edge looks to have a slated cut.

IMO I just would not buy a GAI card without seeing it in person. I knwo there are a lot of people that respected there head grader but the fact of the matter is I hear more problems then anything else about cards in those holders.

Also as far as I can tell the "no returns" line on ebay is total crap. Paypal and or ebay can force you to accept a return, but it may take a while and lots of paper work. I do not know how they will handle this as the card is no longer in the same state is was sold in (assuming SGC cracked it) so that could be an issue.

You are also dealing with one grading company vs another and that could also be a snag. Send it to PSA and hope it gets a grade :-D

James G

So is the card cracked out of the GAI case? If so, did you crack it before sending it to SGC or did SGC crack it?

This is a very interesting paypal case, where i can see both sides thinking they are in the right. Good Luck.

I see this as a more complicated situation. Sure, Todd is stuck with a trimmed card and I hope the seller would consider returning his money. But...

The seller advertised a GAI 7.5 and delivered a GAI 7.5. I'm not sure there is an implied guarantee that it will crossover favorably to every grading service. Plus, he sent it to you graded and in a 7.5 holder; you would be returning it to him raw and trimmed.

How can any seller survive in this market, when the product he is selling is damaged and he may not even know it? This is just one of many reasons why I hate TPG in its current state and feel the industry needs a major overhaul.

Again, I feel bad for Todd and hope he gets compensated, but it's reasonable to think that the seller did nothing more than list his product, and now because of a grader's incompetence he has to take a huge hit.

I don't believe a refund is entitiled. Once the card is broken out, all bets are off. The buyer bought a GAI 7.5 and received a GAI 7.5? What if the cards winds up going to PSA where it gets an '8'!?!?!?!?! I am sorry, but I am siding with the seller on this one.

How do we know the grader is incompetent?!?!?! Who is to say who got it right??? I can't tell you how many times cards have received conflicting grades from different graders. The buyer chose to crack the card out himself. That is on him. Once he did that, no refund should be applied. There is no express guarantee that you will received a favorable ruling from grading company to grading company. It is almost like playing the lottery (the crackout game). And yes, SGC is fallible. I had a 1956 Mantle come back SGC "A". Not quite sure why, as the only crime the card had was being offcentered. PSA agreed and graded it PSA 4 (MC). The funny part is, if you sent it back in to SGC, and it got a grade of '8', and turned a $1,000 GAI card into a $3,000+ SGC card, you will feel pretty silly for this "kill the seller" mentality.....

Re: draw your own conclusions
 

Curiously, I once got a second chance offer from this seller about four hours after the auction ended. Needless to say, I didn't take him up on it.

IMO the above line in Barry's response is the most dead on response I've heard yet. TPG has really become comical and we as collectors should be ashamed of ourselves as we place way to much trust into these guys. This grader says that, that grader says this!! It's just ridiculous. Oh, to answer the question at hand. I to think the buyer got what they purchased which was a GAI graded card. A refund shouldn't be mandatory simply based on what SGC's opinion was. Who says they're even right for cry'in out loud..

Did Todd say the card had been cracked out, or did SGC determine it was trimmed prior to opening the case? That may be the deciding factor in this matter. If it's still in the slab, he should return it because it's not the catd advertised (M101-5.)

Thanks Tony, and the only thing we know with absolute certainty is that one of the graders got it wrong. We're just not certain which one it was.

How is it the Seller's fault?
 

I side with the defendent (SELLER). You bought a graded card from a somewhat reputable grading company (GAI) and took a chance to cross to another company.

How is that the sellers fault? Sometime you hit a homerun changing grades, sometimes you don't.

So the seller has to take back your card and pay to regrade again? You knew what you were getting when you bought GAI.

Clear cut
 

I don't in any way see how any refund here is warranted. Facts: 1) You bid on and bought a graded card. 2) All pertinent facts were disclosed about the card at time of sale, ie. grading company, grade, type of card, No Refunds on graded cards, etc. 3) You received the card offered in the manner that it was offered in a untampered with holder. Fact of law - the transaction ends at this point. No warranties or guarantees were made or implied.

The fact that you chose to submit the card to another grading agency and were then not happy with the result is not germane to the previous argument. It has no bearing on the purchase/sale transaction which again was completed satisfactorily from the point of law.

Personally, I find it surprising that you are making such a fuss about this. It would be interesting to know your motivation for resubmitting the card for grading? Lastly, I wouldn't bother pursuing a lawsuit here, in my opinion you will end up being countersued and most likely be on the hook for at a minimum court costs assuming you have listed all pertinent facts that could be viewed in your favor.

This is a complicated issue. I had assumed card was still in the holder and SGC had not taken it out, if it was seller will have a clear case as to why they won't take it back. My biggest issue at this point is no communication by the seller, by not responding to Todd he made him more upset and things got to this point. This hobby has a lot of gambling aspects to it sometimes and this is one of those cases, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose but this is a huge loss and for the seller to sit silent is not helping out at all.

I don't think the seller needs to defend himself. A deal is a two part system. The seller gives goods to a buyer for an agreed upon compensation (usually a dollar figure).

Once the seller sells the agreed upon item and delivers it safely to the seller, his part of the deal is done.

In this case, it seems like there were good pictures of the item and there was not any misleading descriptions or fuzzy pictures.

The seller does not have to defend themselves, it seems like he held up his half of the transaction.

.

At no time did I state I broke out the card, because I did not. It was submitted as received.

Please don't explain to me your "fact of law". I am well aware of my burden of proof, the elements I must show and the evidence to get there. And yes, there was an implied warranty that the card was in fact unaltered, regardless of subjective numeric grade.

It was no coincidence that seller proclaimed the card as being a very early GAI submission. It is widely known that GAI's grading abilities were most respected when Mike Baker was overseeing the grading there, and that he stopped doing so after the company got up and running. This seller's representation was made to give some assurance that the card was graded during "the good years". I am not convinced it was, as the serial number is higher than any other of the handful or so GAI cards I own.

Really, you don't see the fuss-- I just got taken for a grand. Tell you what, I'll sell it to you for the ebay price, then I won't fuss anymore. My motivation for regrading is interesting? What difference does that make? You think I wanted to create this situation? Countersued? For what?

And Ed, it is curious that you got a second chance offer from this guy just hours after auction's end. It is also curious that an ebay "buyer" has bid on this guy's product 131 times in 30 days, 97% of his overall bids. I am investigating what other curious items exist for this seller, who promotes himself as #1 in customer service and quality product and who then won't respond to his customers at all.

If you're buying an M101-5 and you get a -4, then you should be able to return the card and get your money back.

If it says 'no returns', if they have 'GUARANTEED' in big red letters, a fellow should have some concern about dealing with the folks.

And if a fellow wants an SGC graded card, then he should be buying an SGC graded card in the first place.

I'd like to have one of those Stengel cards. I'd want one that is a bit worn, a soft corner or two, one that hasn't ever been slabbed, one that costs a fraction of that, and one that I'm not afraid to hold.

It is a mess. Wish you well with it.

Also "interesting" is why you're anonymous and full of opinions.

good point
 

Good point. Per the rules, iwantitiwinit's full name needs to be put out here in the post. Please do that or edit out your comments....or do nothing and I will handle it. Nothing personal and feel free to say what you want to.

Todd- at least you will be able to save on lawyer fees if it goes that far. You have that going for you. Good luck with this poor situation. It certainly was not as advertised, there is no debate on that.

I think one question that could be instrumental that hasn't been answered yet is:

Is the card still in it's GAI holder or has it been busted out?

.

That doesn't mean that SGC didn't break it out when examining it. My question should be restated then:

Is it still in it's original GAI holder?

That doesn't mean it is still in the holder. That just says it was submitted in the holder.


Edited to add that what Phil just said I was saying at the same time...

Stating No Returns, As Is or All Sales Final, means nothing any longer under the new ebay and paypal rules. Just read the policy on seller requirements relating to a SNAD. If upon receipt the buyer simply does not agree with the grade assigned by the 3rd party grader, (despite the grading co's guaranty on the grade) they can file a SNAD claim and will prevail every time. The seller can merely delay the inevitable.

And as Peter pointed out it does appear that this seller has a single buyer with 6 feedback who really really loves the cards he sells. Must be great to have a customer like that in this economy!

Greg

Thanks Bill and Leon.

Frank, I don't need the card to be graded by SGC "in the first place". I have cards from these sets in all 5 company holders, including one "PRO" that I know to be authentic and unaltered, albeit overgraded. The holder means nothing to me so long as the card is good. Similarly, I didn't care about the numeric grade, and I submitted this with a request for a minimum 60. I didn't/don't need just a nm example of this card-- I would take one in most grades and my collection of this set spans from grades 2 to 8, depending on back.

I submitted this card because I was concerned about its being trimmed--while some don't mind altered cards, I do, and certainly so at the non-altered price. I submitted it within 24 hours of receiving it, and requested the 24 hour turnaround time, both out of fairness to the seller--if I was going to seek a refund I wanted to do so timely.

I believe the seller wanted bidders to have some faith in this being a GAI card from the Baker era; if so, he is no dummy as to the hobby. He not only advertised it as a "very early GAI" card in big bold letters immediately following the card's identification, he even paid extra to include that in the listing line. Why place such importance on this attribute unless you expected people to consider it significant?

Sellers need to stand behind what they sell, period. I agree with Todd 100%.

Todd, when you say "The holder means nothing to me so long as the card is good." I have difficulty believing that... I think the holders do mean something to you. Here are some holders that meant nothing to me...

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j1...slabdebris.jpg


If you're leaving the card in the holder then the holder does mean something to you.




Now I do think that you should be able to undo the deal, return the card, and get your money back. But I still think if you're wanting an SGC card, buy one. If you are buying from a seller who has no returns and all of that 'guarantee' language you need to have your eyes open and pay attention.

I see both sides on this one, kinda tricky especially if the card is no longer in the GAI holder.

Todd, you knew you were getting an M101-4 when you bought it (I assume) since you know as much as anyone about this issue did you not? You know the Sporting News back isn't found on M101-5's, despite what was in the description.

todd's not stupid to crack out a 1k gai card, and sgc would never crack out a card w/o the submitter's consent.

obviously seller should do the right thing and refund and not stick the buyer with a trimmed card. todd has alot experience with those Ms and if he suspects it's trimmed i'll take his/sgc words over GAI. from my experience tho i woulda asked the seller beforehand with gai/beckett slabs would they guarantee it'll cross unaltered to SGC...if not i stay away.

What riles me most about this, and it has nothing to do with Todd's dilemma, is that one company calls it NR MT+, and another calls it trimmed. And we've all seen far too many situations like this before.

How can TPG continue this way? This just isn't fair to collectors. I accept that no company gets it right all the time, but I have a right to demand a higher level of proficiency and a greater consensus among the various companies. If there are five grading companies out there and they each have their own distinct grading criteria, then the system doesn't work.

Todd poorly predicates his case if he posts here that he knew it was a -4 and not a -5; and that he knew that a card in a GAI holder may well be mistakenly graded.

I agree with Barry to a point. Ideally, TPG should work as he suggests. But it doesn't. And that's why I'm content to collect without it. I do understand why folks want it, there are a bunch of reasons. Again, if you're leaving your card in a slab then the slab does mean something to you...

If this card would have came back from SGC graded and slabbed would you still seek a refund? Did you know at the time you sent the card into SGC to have it cross graded that it wasn't the card type the seller had in his auction?
If you did, and you wanted to see what the grade was when it came back from SGC and it ended up unfavorable for you then all of the sudden now you want a refund? To me it seems very unfair.

How long did you wait for a response from the seller? Sometimes people don't have access to the internet 24/7 or they just simply don't respond right away. Did you give him enough time to respond?

As mentioned before you seem very knowledgable about this particular issue yet you still bought the card knowing that it was the wrong card listed in that acution. There is a picture of the back of that card. The question that I got is what was your true intentions once you bought this card?

In my opinion I would think the sellers responsibility ended when you sent the card in to SGC.

Just my 2 cents.

todd knew what he bought...the -4/-5 is just a technicality in case he needs it to get his money back. if people actually bother to read his post he did say he has these cards in all 5 holders, including PRO. his main concern with the card when he first got it was it's trimmed, so he sent it to SGC for a 2nd opinion. he got the confirmation, seller should refund. how hard is that? anyways TPG is not the problem, incompetent TPG is...and GAI falls in that category.

If that is your opinion, then you should not dump money on GAI cards.

Simple,

Rawn

agreed
 

+1

Tough one
 

This is a tough one but the logical extention of those that feel the buyer should be refunded is that any GAI bought card if resubmitted to another TPG and is deemed altered (or less than GAI # grade) would be eligible for a refund.

Thus, one could buy 10 GAI cards (which sell for less than the other TPGs due to the skepticism of their service) and do quite well by resubbing them and keeping the ones that cross successfully and returning the ones that don't.

In short, I think it's the buyer's responsibility to factor in the risk/reward of buying GAI and bid accordingly.

Well spoken, Patrick. I don't try to buy top end furniture from Walmart either.

Rawn

The question of whether the card is still in it's original GAI holder has still not been answered yet, so that leads me to the conclusion that it isn't still in the GAI holder.....therefore, a return would not and should not be accepted.

Second, if the buyer is so well versed in this set, he should have known when purchasing it, and certainly when he received it, that it wasn't the same issue as advertised. At that very moment, he should have been allowed a return, but not after submitting it to SGC. And certainly not after it was broken out of it's GAI holder, if indeed it has been broken out. That question remains.

He sold him a GAI graded card, not a SGC graded card.

Frank, let me clarify for you. I don't care which holder the card is in, so long as it is good. You stated that if I wanted a card in an SGC holder, I should wait for one to come along. My point is I don't need the card in an SGC holder-- I have about equal numbers of SGC and PSA cards, some Beckett and GAI and the one Pro. All of these together are about one-half of my m101-s--the rest are raw. So the name on the holder is irrelevant. Maybe one day when I sell my m101s the particular holder will make a difference, but I expect that's years down the road.

I never said I didn't know the card was m101-4. I merely responded to a post stating that I got an m101-5 Stengel. I did not. See post 6. That is my only comment on that issue.

Barry, when I get more time I'll offer my opinion on the TPG topic. But again, I couldn't care less what the number on the holder states, so long as it is unaltered. So those who think I ought not to be able to get a bump are missing the point-- I told SGC I would have taken a three-grade drop.

The issue is one of trimming--an unaltered vs. altered card. Whether a card is trimmed or not is a question of fact, not opinion. It either happened or it didn't, and if it did, it cripples the card's value. Now who you believe to establish whether a card is trimmed is one thing, but if it happened, it happened. Frankly, SCG is almost a red herring here. Suppose I was the world's foremost authority on trimming, and I could show you that this card was trimmed. Then SGC's involvement is immaterial-- I bought an altered card. Any card that carries a numeric grade implicitly warrants that the cards is unaltered, and every seller selling such a card had better stand behind it, or, at a minimum (and this might not be good enough if he has actual knowledge of the trimming) expressly state that he makes no assurances that the card is authentic and unaltered. That's my position in a nutshell, although the seller's representations about an early GAI submission provides additional fodder, IMO.

The seller was selling you a GAI numbered card, and that is what you got. The card world will be in a worse mess if sellers of slabbed cards are guaranteeing that the slabs are right. It would be the TPG, if anyone, who guarantees that.

And from the last post, the slab does matter to you, you are indifferent as to which slab it is, as long as it is right. That's different from "the holder means nothing to me." Thanks for clearing that up.

So is the thing to do to mail that GAI holdered card back to the seller, registered mail, and request a refund? I don't see how you get a refund until you make a return.

I couldn't agree with you more on the text in bold print. If he would have requested a refund at that time I would have no issues as a seller with a customer requesting a refund. However, after sending the card into another TPG company and have it returned as altered I would not give the buyer a refund. The buyer should have to shoulder the pain and take it as a lesson learned.

If that's your position, then you lose. Period! It is one TPG's word against another and you have no way to prove which is right. Both are professional (although some could argue the point about GAI) grading companies paid to render an opinion. If you did not trust GAI, you never should have bough the card. On the other hand, if you approach it from the angle that you bought a M101-5 and received an M101-4, I think you have a case for a SNAD - although I believe you knew what you were buying all along.

Still has not answered the question of whether the card is still in the original GAI holder.

Just to bring this topic back to Todd's title, it's obvious that everyone should beware of this seller. There have been 2 threads this week about cards he sold in holders that appear to be altered (the other one is here), he's regularly shill bidding his own auctions, and he doesn't respond to buyer inquiries.


Bill

+1

Bill, I agree, that is the most disturbing thing to me about this seller that I hadn't known about initially. I'm not 100% sure where I stand on Todd's case specifically but the shill bidding is VERY upsetting and I doubt I'll be bidding on his future items (unless I'm comfortable knowing someone is shilling me up!:D)

Let's be clear. Are you saying that the seller is altering cards?

I do not have the card. It was shipped on Wednesday and has not arrived. The grade as reported on the website was 0-T. I phoned SGC and was told it was trimmed along the top edge. I submitted it in the GAI holder. I expect to receive it in the GAI holder.

Frank, you love taking things out of context. No and again, the holder is insignificant and essentially meaningless. SGC could send the damn thing back to me unholdered with a written report that it is authentic and unaltered and that would suffice--they just do not offer that service, to my understanding.

I did not seek a refund because the card was a m101-4. I seek a refund because I received a damaged card, one that has been altered. And vintagetoppsguy, your comment that I cannot "prove" that it was trimmed because two TPGs have differing opinions is simply incorrect. It is either trimmed or it is not. I accept that I would bear the burden of proving the trim. Surely if everyone on this forum and SGC examined the card and concluded that it was trimmed you would not adhere to the notion that I "lose" because GAI didn't agree.

I acknowledge that a numeric grade is subjective and there should be no guarantees that a "7" is indeed a nm card. That does not excuse the grading company's basic obligation to confirm that a card is authentic and unaltered. Again, that is a confirmation of fact, not an expression of opinion. The misrepresentation of a fact is grounds to set aside a transaction and/or recover damages, and here the TPG and the seller are both representing that this card is unaltered, regardless of whether they expressly state those words. "No returns accepted" does not cut it, and I if seller wants to take the position of caveat emptor on the basis of those three words, well, I'll take my chances with a judge on that.

No, I didn't say or even imply that. The T222 Alexander was sold in the same holder in a Goodwin auction in 2006; you can look it up on their website.

I said that I would beware of buying cards in holders from this seller, I'd beware of his shilling his own auctions, and I wouldn't expect a response if I had a problem.


Bill

Mea Culpa
 

Mea culpa i did not realize that he advertised a M101-5 and you in fact received a M101-4. Given that I retract my entire past statement.

If you really believe the card to be trimmed, shouldn't you go after the grading company and not the seller? Even if the seller was the one that submitted the card (which I don't believe is the case), he paid for a professional opinion and the mistake was made the GAI, not the seller.

Let's say you're buying a house and pay for an professional inspection. The inspection comes back okay, but a month later you find the house is infested with termites. Do you go after the seller of the house for compensation or the inspector who missed the problem?

Mea culpa i did not realize that he advertised a M101-5 and you in fact received a M101-4. Given that I retract my entire past statement.

If that's not what you said or implied, then why do we need to "beware of buying cards in holders from this seller?" It sounds to me like he is selling the cards in good faith. If here were the one that submitted the cards, I could see you're point. However, that is not the case. In both cases, he is selling cards that were previously graded by another submitter. I agree with you on the shilling point. One can make up their own mind if they want to do business with them or not. But I think your comment "beware of buying cards in holders from this seller" isn't justified.

Not only that, but having a 7 day return policy means nothing now too even though ebay forces me to click on that box when I'm listing auctions. I had a guy turn me in to ebay for an item he'd had in his possession for more than 20 days before filing a claim. Ebay sided with him.

Just my opinion -

* The seller indicates NO RETURNS ACCEPTED.
* The card was professionally (and I use that term loosely) graded by GAI.
* The card is no longer in a TPG holder with a HIGH numerical grade.

Because it was in a TPG holder I would almost assume that the no returns is based on the fact that it was "passed" by a TPG.

I see many sellers using this same ploy/tactic - "hey, if it's in a slab then it's gotta be good". I think we all kind of know that's bull $hit.

A good seller would refund the money (if it was still in the TPG slab - which this isn't). Because the card is removed from the TPG slab I don't think the seller has any obligation to buy it back.

A knowledgable collector would know that a GAI graded card is somewhere between PRO and SGC/PSA. I wouldn't touch GAI cards unless there is a nice discount associated with it because I'm always suspicious of GAI cards (with numerical grades) possibly being trimmed. This isn't to say that SGC and PSA haven't let their share of trimmed cards be given a numerical grade, this is just my opinion that GAI has provided numerical grades to a larger percentage of trimmed cards - and that is what I consider "common knowledge" to advanced collectors.

It's a sad situation because it really makes it difficult to appreciate the hobby when something like this comes up.

Unfortunately, this is our hobby - today. People rely on TPG and swear by it when assigning a value to a card.

According to Todd the card is on its way back from SGC and he believes it is still in the GAI slab...with that said, I'd like to know how any TPG can tell for certain a card is trimmed if it's still in the slab.

+2

The seller should do what is right and refund the money, but that might be a mess of a situation. When it comes down to it the M101-4/M101-5 difference might be the loophole you need to make a valid case.

Edited to Add: Only once out of let's say 25 crossovers did SGC actually crack the card out and then realize it was either altered or wasn't going to meet the minimum grade I specified. Fortunately it was a low end card and they made good on it.

Bill and Leon (and others), thanks again. My main purpose was to point you all to this guy as someone you need to view carefully, and I recognized that others might disagree with me on my particular situation. Thanks to Peter for unearthing the apparent shilling as well, and to Ed for pointing out a second chance offer received from this guy just hours after an auction. I believe there are several things about this seller that do not pass the smell test.

I'm not saying I could not go after the grading company. Nor am I saying the seller could not go against the grading company, or whoever he bought the card from, depending on the facts. More power to him if he was wronged by someone else.

Both. This happens frequently in the context you mention. Sellers often fail to disclose known problems which ultimately are shown to have existed for some time and with their knowledge. Buyer may go after the inspector for failing to spot the problem, but surely is not limited to that party as a defendant.

There is also an argument for the implied warranty of merchantability (or habitability with the case of a house), whereby goods must reasonably conform to an ordinary buyer's expectations, sometimes measured by standards for such goods "as pass ordinarily in the trade". In the case of cards, I submit that the standards require that any graded card with a numeric grade must be authentic and unaltered to "pass ordinarily in the hobby". As a rule, people do not buy numerically graded cards with the expectation that they have been altered.

When will all this end???? What if you sent it in to PSA, and they graded it an '8.5'.....the bottom line is you are getting differing opinions from different graders, and there is no consitency. I am still not 100% convinced the card is actually trimmed! The seller listed a GAI 7.5 graded card and delivered a GAI 7.5 graded card. To me, this is an open and shut case...tranasction over!

I repeat? WHO SAID THE CARD IS ALTERED?!?! SGC???? GAI SAID THE CARD IS GOOD! Send the card to PSA and then ISA for that matter. Majority wins. Right now, the score is tied 1-1....

I agree with bobbyw8469. I sent in a T201 Cobb/Crawford to SGC about 3 years ago to be graded and it came back with evidence of being trimmed. I sent the SAME card back in to SGC about a month later and it came back holdered in Ex. condition. So who do I believe? The first grader at SGC who said it was trimmed or the second grader at SGC who graded it Excellent?

Bobby, that is what I have been saying all along. Perhaps you just worded it a little better than I did and maybe the sports analogy will help him understand (tied 1-1). It is one TPG's word against another. In a court of law, the burden of proof is on the palintiff and he can't PROVE that the card was trimmed - it is one professional's opinion against another. Hell, SGC didn't even have the card in hand and looked at it only through a slab. I also agree that he should send it in to PSA and see what they have to say if he has any chance of winning.

+1 I was thinking the same thing while reading this thread.

Personally, when I purchase graded cards, I limit myself to PSA, SGC, and Beckett. I stay away from the other companies as I am not comfortable with their grading for this very reason.

I do the same, unless it is a low dollar card where I can't get burned too much. I would never buy a graded card figuring I could get a refund if I took it to another TPG seeking their opinion.

I have been lucky enough to not have to seek a refund on a graded card except once where the description didn't match up with the picture at all and I was able to get my money back. I am thinking this is the only way the OP can get his money back even though the mis-description isn't as extreme.

The main problem you're going to run into, is that you cannot return the item as purchased. By cracking the slab, whether done by you or SGC, you actually changed what it is. Basically, you cannot give the seller back exactly what he sent you. The slab WAS a major part of the purchase, and that has now since been compromised.

I know the saying is "buy the card, not the holder", BUT anytime you buy a graded/slabbed card(whether the slab is correct or not), that is exactly what you are buying, and NOT just a card.

I thought we were under the impression that the slab wasn't compromised?

Correct. The OP never said that the slab had been cracked. Somebody assumed that along the way and others who comment aren't reading all the posts.

Sorry, yeah. I just caught up on the entire thread. As long as the card is still holdered, there shouldn't be any issues returning it. But it seems no one is 100% sure that this is the case yet though.

Anyways, assuming it's still holdered, this will again come back to the "NO REFUNDS" thing. If you bought the item after seeing that in the listing, then you technically entered into a contract with the seller, knowing that there would be "NO REFUNDS".

Wow, I'd hate to be in this position, on both sides. If I was the seller and had bought the card in the GAI holder, then later sold it in the same holder, I'd feel like I'd held up my end of the bargain and should not have to refund the money. But on the buyers side, I'd hate to be stuck with an altered card.

I say resubmit to SGC/PSA/Beckett and hope for the best. Good luck.

So if I won a SGC numerically graded card from a Brockelman & Luckey auction and sent the card to PSA (in the SGC holder) and it came back as trimmed, should Leon give me my money back?

+1

Re: Beware Carterscards2006
 

As Barry said earlier, sellers need to stand behind their product. Many sellers, including some prominent auction houses, like to hide behind third party graders. This auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was authentic and unaltered. If Todd fulfils that burden of proof that the card is trimmed, he is entitled to a refund. All of the other stuff about GAI and SGC, -4 or -5 and cracked or not cracked is irrelevant.

I disagree about the cracked and not cracked out part. Who is to say someone can't crack out a card and replace it with a trimmed example? This is getting a bit off topic, but if I buy a card slabbed and crack it out I am doing that knowing that there is no chance I am going to get a refund.