Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
It's one thing to call and ask for specifics about a card's condition when no description is given. I do that with at least some degree of regularity. But in this case, there was no reason to ask questions about this card because they gave specifics about the card's condition in the description ("Soiling and wear are evident on the front, but nothing takes away from the pinstriped Gehrig central image. Clear verso."). To call them up and ask if they omitted something else significant (like a half dozen giant creases) would have been to assume that they were lying.
As far as calling them out, I disagree. This sort of behavior is rampant in this hobby and it's completely inexcusable. They did what they did, and bidders should be made aware of it. And this wasn't the only card they did it with either. I have another, much more expensive card that had an even more in-depth description, but which also omitted the fact that there were multiple creases on it. In fact, I would say that the description of the other card was so precise that it could be effectively interpreted as "there are no creases on this card". Yet it arrived with multiple hidden creases as well.
They have an opportunity to make this right. If they do, then I will certainly be sharing that information. People make mistakes. But when auction houses do wrong by their customers, that information needs to be shared with the community.
|
You reasonably relied on how the auction house advertised/described the card, and the scans that it provided. In my lay opinion, the description and scans do not reveal the card’s obvious and main patent defects. You have a valid complaint. Hopefully, you all can reach a compromise. Good luck, and keep us posted.