Posted By:
BcDanielson what your talking about before believing you have an answer! Let me break some of your thoughts down for you here~
I don't think... September 17 2003, 2:03 PM
Sorry, but I don't think PSA will agree to grade a card WHILE IT IS STILL IN A HOLDER ... so I don't think you writing some "request" on your submission form is the equivalent of a contract.
Wes clued you in.......it's a slam dunk on this issue. Plus,what I laid out made this irrelevant anyway as I more than implied they take responsibility for a mistake reguardless of the submission form*
I just don't think they have the ability to grade a card while it is still encapsulated ... so I think part of sending the cards in for grading is the assumption that they will be REMOVED from the slabs.
The obviously think they can and make quite a bit a money per month doing so!
Again -- I am just playing Devil's advocate since that is what lawyers are trained to do.
Your more like the Devil's lowest Toady because your points lack foundation based on both the particulars and the stipulations of the agreement you did not read! The Devil is more informed than you here! lol~
Assume for a second that PSA is able to REMOVE your cards from the PSA slabs and give them back to you in the original condition (but unslabbed).
I think that BEFORE you can prove in court that you have suffered damages ... you will be REQUIRED to send them back to SGC for grading.
YOU ARE 100% INCORRECT AS SGC HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONTRACT. READ GREG'S ADDENDUM RESPONSE FOR DETAILS AS TO HOW THIS IS SO.
At that point, you will clearly have suffered damages to the extent that you paid PSA for "nothing" and you had to pay SGC again.
WHO said I would pay anything? And who would make me send them to SGC? How they come back from SGC has nothing to do with what happened between myself and PSA.
BUT ... if the cards come back to you with the ORIGINAL SGC grades on them again ... then you have NOT lost any "value" on your cards.
not my responsibility again to secure this if it were an option which it is not.
You will have had a miserable experience ... but you will be back to square one.
TYour idea on how it works here after is not an option!
HOWEVER ... if they DID come back from SGC with lower grades on them ... THEN you will have proved your point and will have exhaused all opportunities to mitigate your damages.
it's implied in crossovers-you send cards in to get equal or better grades! Why else would you do it? They know this and do not according to the contract,crack cards that won't cross from visula viewing in the present holder!
Again, I have not read the PSA submission requirements, but I think that it probably says somewhere that they cannot grades cards while they are still slabbed. Heck, I'll bet it even says somewhere that PSA is IMMUNE for any damage done to your card while they are trying to unslab it.
OK,and how much would you enjoy loosing here?
Your logic about being a "big PSA customer" is not truly relevant, since it almost sounds like you think they will give you whatever grade YOU WANT just to keep you happy
your way off the mark here*
a) I DID NOT IMPLY,STATE OR ELUDE TO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN ANY WAY,SHAPE OR FORM........
b) I made no comment about being a customer either~
my comment was about being very involved in the REGISTRY thus the Registry people take another area of concern on this issue as it taints to motive for me doing it in the first place-FOR THE REGISTRY***
-- which in a nutshell is what you asked them to do: AGREE with SGC in every case.
I DID NOT-GO READ THE CONTRACT. I ASKED THEM TO CROSS CARDS OVER AND AGREED WITH THEM TO HAVE THEM DO SO -ONLY IF THEY MEET EQUAL OR SUPERIOR GRADES ACCORDING TO "THEIR" GRADING STANDARDS-NOT SGC'S!!!! THEY ARE CLEARLY DIFFERENT.....ESPECIALLY ON CENTERING OF HIGH GRADE VINTAGE!!!
After all ... what if you had sent in 8 cards that had received a 10 from "PRO" grading service and asked them to be slabbed by PSA? Would you really expect them to agree? That would be akin to "acknowledging" that the competition is on par with PSA.
YOUR ASSUMING THEY USE THR SAME STANDARDS!!! THEY DO NOT HG***
Plus-as my wife always say's to me; " That is a what if that doesn't exist so it is irrelavant."
GRANTED, I know your MAIN beef is that they removed your cards from the SGC holders
tTHAT IS THE ONLY BEEF! AND AGAIN YOUR LOGIC IS OVERRIDDEN BY THE MERE FACTS GREG LAID OUT IN EXPLAINING THE MARKET VALUE OF "PLASTIC". THE VALUE IS IN THE # ASSIGNED NOT THE CARD!!! THIS HAS BEEN OUR CONGLOMMORATE COLLCTORS GRIF FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS NOW. THAT IS WHY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD ALWAYS STATE 'BUY THE CARD ,NOT THE PLASTIC" BECAUSE MOST COLLECTORS BUY THE PLASTIC!
-- but UNLESS the card PHYSICALLY CHANGED in some way -- I don't "legally" think that you can prevail in showing that the value of the card has diminished.
IRRELEVANT-THE PLASTIC CHANGED AND THAT IS ALL THAT MATTERS..........PSA AND SGC ARE IN THE "PROFFESSIONAL" PLASTIC ENCAPSULATION BUSINESS...... WHAT THEY ARE DOING IT TO IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE. THE VALUE DIFFERENCE IN THE PLASTIC ASSIGNED GRADE IS ALL THAT MATTERS........
AFTER ALL -- it would only take someone about 10 minutes on this board to point out the 200 vintage card collectors who say:
"I don't pay attention to the grading companies -- I inspect them myself before I buy them."
this is a minority in the collector World,as WE are a minority. That is why we all know everything about each other and who has what ahd who would bid on what! This community is small to say the least!
I think sending the cards back to SGC "raw" will be the best solution ... and then if they "undergrade" them this time ... THEN you can rely on the experts on this board to assess your damages
SGC has nothing to do with PSA violating my contract. Third time this has already been proposed to you. This is the legal fact. SGC does not have to be involved in the least. As Greg saud again,they already graded the cards!
Brian: Do you still have the carbon copy of your submission form where you clearly stated the "minimum" acceptable grade for your cards??
yes,as wallpaper and toilet paper rolls I am about to auction on e-bay! Pre-1930 Vintage catagory only!
And I still think.... September 17 2003, 2:09 PM
I do, however, still think that a court of law would require you to resubmit (in raw form) the cards to SGC in an attempt to mitigate your damages.
earth the HG- "NO MOMMY" consult a real attorney for details. I did!
If they all came back with the original grades, then that would obviously help lessen your claim for damages.
please get over this logic of muddying the water with SGC's involvement. It is the wrong road your mind visited here. Listen to Greg!
Until you have done this ... the defense (PSA) would still have this argument hanging out there ... and it could prove fatal for your case.
HG-I am 5-0 in legal matters against card dealers! I could tell you about my biggy with one of the most well known scumbag dealers in the business! trust me bro-I have been here before.I know what I am doing and really just needed the brotherhood's opinion on Values as a reference for negotiating if they do not recapsulate the cards in the previous grades. Peter at PSA is very amicable thus far.I have hope this will all work out.Doing my homework with numbers to compare is helpful.I do not want a legal issue with these folks.I won some of the friggin stock! I want it to go up not effected by some legal issue over 3-4k.
Respond to this message
halleygator
216.173.168.250 And to be clear... September 17 2003, 2:14 PM
And just to be clear...
you should require PSA to REMOVE the cards from their holders and submit them to SGC, NOT YOU!!!
This will PREVENT PSA from arguing that you "switched" the cards or damaged them yourself while removing them.
Put the pressure on PSA to get SGC to regrade your cards with the original grades.
IF PSA CANNOT DELIVER ... then YOU WIN ... assuming that you did make it clear on your submission form that you wanted certain minimum grades.
Wediscusse all theese options so thanks for the assurance I am covered. I'll post the results. : )