Beware Carterscards2006

[chaddurbin]

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.

[carrigansghost]

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

Simple,

Rawn

[Leon]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

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.

+1

[mintacular]

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.

[carrigansghost]

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

Rawn

[pgellis]

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.

[T205]

Originally Posted by pgellis

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.

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.

[pgellis]

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

[bcornell]

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

[nolemmings]

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.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

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.

+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.