What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Scott, an open mind is a good thing -to a point. You're analysis would be valid if Joe's card was trimmed (significantly) I just hate to see Joe waste two weeks and another... What $25? on shipping back to Jersey for a resub.<br /><br /> I'm glad at least Josh sees the flaw has nothing whatever to do with the scanner. <br /><br /> On initial inspection this card could fool many. It is a convincingly aged COU. Outside of the lack of chipping (for the condition) color and clarity on the front coupled with improper scaling and elongated type on the back, this card now screams fake. I'm a PSA guy, mostly but SGC made the right call on this.<br /><br /> Sure like to see a blacklight comparison.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1196005505.JPG">

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>joe</b><p>Hello fellow Guys and Gals collectors.<br /><br />Here is an email I received from Newell, my response is below his email. Not sure if he took my advice to check out the NET54 forum discussion. <br />I do have one question, do I have to cancel the sale to send his money back or can he do the whole thing from his end? I think I will keep the card and give him his money back.<br /><br />Joe<br /><br /><br /> <br />From: BRN1939@aol.com <br />To: jmaples0871@charter.net <br />Subject: Re: Mino on EBAY <br />Size: 3 KB <br /><br />AS I SEE IT YOU HAVE THREE OPTIONS<br /> <br />1. SEND CARD AND EXCHANGE FEEDBACKS<br /> <br />2. REFUND THE MONEY AND NO FEEDBACK EXCHANGE<br /> <br />3. FILE REPORT WITH EBAY AND PAYPAL WHICH WILL SURELY CAUSE YOU PROBLEMS<br />IN ANY ADVENT YOU CANNOT KEEP THE CARD AND THE MONEY............YOUR CHOICE LET ME KNOW HOW YOU WISH TO HANDLE IT<br /><br /> <br />From: jmaples0871@charter.net <br />To: BRN1939@aol.com <br />Subject: Re: Mino on EBAY <br />Size: 1 KB <br /><br />I'll let you know on Monday, lot's of discussion on the NET54 Forum site about this situuation. You might want to take a look at the comments. <br />Subject on NET54 Site "What would you do?" <br /> <br /> <br /><br /><br><br>Ty Cobb, Spikes flying!

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Rob Dewolf</b><p>Wow, Joe, nice helping of attitude you received.<br /><br />In any "advent," I'm sorry you got caught up in such a crappy situation.<br /><br />Rob

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Frank B</b><p> Situations like this come up frequently in my business.<br />One oft-used solution is arbitration by peers and that decision <br />is final. I would suggest honoring the latest transaction and<br />ask for arbitration on the previous one. Sounds like both <br />are good guys and both experienced. They should have <br />no problem putting it in the hands of others who will<br />make a decision based on what's fair and good for all.<br /><br /> One possible problem is that many have weighed in on how <br />they view this matter so getting the parties to agree on<br />the arbiter(s) may be an issue. Compromise is usually the <br />answer in a case like this. No harm was intended it seems.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Joanne as usual makes very compelling remarks.<br /><br /><br />Jo, make it hard for him to get his dough back, make him do all the work.<br /><br /><br />Judge Judy, she was able to call the thief a thief cuz the seller in the cell phone transaction listed the item as weighing a certain amount when in fact the picture she sent was not the same weight. That is what the judge based her decision on if my memory is correct.<br /><br /><br />Bill...........you must be kidding.<br /><br /><br />All.........Sellers of sportscards (or whatever) are bound forever if they sell a fake (or reprint) as legit. Regardless if they knew or didn't know at the time of sale. <br /><br /><br /><br />again, jmo<br /><br /><br /><br />Steve

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>Joe ,<br />I changed my mind in what I first said to you to do with the card. I think looking at the responses you have recieved I feel you would be justified in anything you want to do with the card. Newell may be a stand up guy in some peoples eyes but his handling of this situation was just wrong. Weather he knew or not ,or his eyesite is bad arenot very good excuses,and doesnt excuse him from now being just a common thief in my eyes. Sorry you lost the 1200 and Newell if you are reading this your a sorry excuse of a person. I guess your reputation was worth 1200! But as Ive seen when it comes to money even the most STAND UP guy isnot always honest.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>I heard a very similar story at the National about how Brooks just can't see the cards well enough to tell what he's dealing in. So you're not alone Joe.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>The funniest responses were from people, after learning that the seller was legally blind, suggested that Joe had no choice now but to drop his beef. I don't care if the seller doesn't have opposable thumbs: a rip-off is a rip-off. While I believe that the seller didn't knowingly rip Joe off, he still has to stand behind his product which, in this case, very well may have been a fake.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jeff- this is yet another case of blind American justice.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>it shouldn't be too hard to make a comparison of the card as it looks now to the picture from the original auction. There are clear "markings" that will prove if it is the same card. if so, a refund is in order - with interest I might add!

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Regardless of someone's situation a deal is a deal...a bad deal is a bad deal. There is a fairly big issue I get to be part of right now, on the BST pages, where one member is having big personal problems. That's sort of a bummer, and I am sympathetic, but the situation still needs to be handled. One of the participants is very understanding but the other is not being quite as easy to deal with.<br /><br />I hope this Cobby situation gets worked out satisfactorily but I have my doubts.....In the end we should all try to treat each other the way we want to be treated...I know I try to.....regards

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Part of the problem with resolving this problem is that people have not established conclusively that the Cobby is counterfeit. Although SGC makes few mistakes, this could be one of them.<br /><br />The statute of limitations for fraud starts when the fraud is first discovered so that should not be an issue here. However, here in CA you need to return the item promptly if you want to claim fraud.<br /><br />Federal law may also apply, but I haven't found the specific statute yet.<br /><br />Peter C.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Scott M.</b><p>I'm certainly willing to keep an open mind on the issue.<br /><br />How do you explain the image of the back of my T205 which resides in an SGC 50 holder next to the card in question where the back lines up just fine?<br /><br />

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Peter, I thought you weren't sleeping nights because some scumbag ripped off a blind person?

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>G. Maines</b><p>What I would do is: I would look at the green area of the card under about<br />50x magnification (with my $25 pocket microscope obtained from the internet)<br />and if I saw yellow, pink, blue or black dots, I would be concerned that the<br />card was made after WWII, but if I saw only green dots, I would be assured<br />that it was made prior to WWII - when t205 prices were so low that nobody<br />would bother to make a fake.<br />Then I would check the gold border to see if it was real gold, or just gold<br />printing.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cycleback.com/baseballcards/twelve.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.cycleback.com/baseballcards/twelve.html</a>

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>We're all trying to authenticate this from a scan, which is not always easy to do. But I would think that if most of us had the card in hand, we could tell in half a minute.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>sagard</b><p>This guy is now bullying you with his three options email. The bottom line is you seem more trustworthy than the buyer. I believe he whether it was inadvertant or not stole $1200 from you. At this point I would claim the $400 as payment on that debt and if he wants to have a good old fashion Ebay war then so be it. His eyes are not an excuse for the way he is acting now or then.<br /><br />Keep in mind there could be unpleasant Ebay and Paypal consequences. If your perfect record or PayPal utility is worth more than $400 to you then you need to decide which option is best.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Scott, <br /><br /> Anyone can see that you're card has been enlarged vertically, of course the print blocks of both will now align properly. After looking at those scans of equally sized cards, and you still can't agree that the printed portion on the SGC/COU is significantly larger, then I concede this issue. Steve F<br /><br /> <br /><br />"A blink is as good as a nod to a blind mule." Deputy Fife

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I agree with Sagard. Funny how now the seller has a myriad of logical choices for Joe now -- but was unable to produce any choices at all for Joe when he sold him a fake card.<br /><br />

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Scott M.</b><p>No reason to conceed the issue. I think we are having a healthy discussion. <br /><br />Regarding the image of my card, it was not enlarged at all. It was scanned at 300 dpi and then proportinately reduced in size to match the size of the card in question. Note that my card has a bit more border on the bottom and, as such, extends a bit beyond the image of the card in question.<br /><br />You made the following statement: "After looking at those scans of equally sized cards". That is part of my point in the matter. How do you know from the scans that you are comparing equally sized cards? <br /><br />IMO, the card in question could very well be real but a bit short top to bottom while the two examples you are comparing it with obviously have much more border on the bottom in particular.<br /><br />If this is the case and the image of the "full" cards are resized to the same image size as that the "shorter" card then it would distort the comparison of the cards and would look a lot like what you've shown.<br /><br />I'm not saying you are wrong, I am just saying that I don't think we can say definitively either way based upon the scans.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Ahh, If the T205 has undersized or trimmed borders then the print will appear to encompass more of the back area! Obviously the front would exhibit the same characteristic which this one doesn't. <br /><br />I get your point now. Sure, that is a possiblity. <br /><br />They named a town in Mass after me, Marblehead.<br /><br />Steve F

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Alan</b><p>Let's take a poll on what Joe should do ? Or maybe, the poll should be on how long before Leon says, "This thread is getting too public, I'm locking it !!!"

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>joe</b><p>Just an update to board menbers and anyone else with interest. I spoke with Brooks Newell today and there is a resolution to this problem in the works. He wanted me to say there is a 7 day return policy in his sale ads. I don't see it in mine , but I will say there was, but I still had to get the card graded. Myself, Brooks and Leon are working on a solution. <br /><br />I will update when everything is finalized. <br /><br /><br />Thanks for everyone's advice.<br /><br />Joe<br><br>Ty Cobb, Spikes flying!

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I spoke with Brooks and Joe today. It does look like 2 good guys are taking care of an old issue....And for all of this extra work I am doing I am going to have to raise everyone's Net54 membership fees 100%... <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> take care

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>So Joe, Brooks added a fourth option? What a guy.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Tim Newcomb</b><p>I guess some of you have had good experiences with Brooks, but I've never gotten a good vibe there-- this just confirms it, in my opinion. Hope Joe can get a decent resolution.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>I recently had a guy win an auction from me. He had blantly ripped me off in the past as well as several other companies. I never even considered keeping the money and promptly refunded him. I then block him and reposted him to my ebay rep. The funny thing is that he fought me a great deal to get the item which was only $40 and not hard to find. He even threatened to report me to ebays "seller refusing to sell" BS group but I knew he couldn't do anything and I also knew he had no basis for his threats.<br /><br />IMO a seller has a right to refuse a sale much like they can end an auction almost any time.<br /><br />In this case as well as mine the other side was always arguing and attacking which certainly is not the way to go.<br /><br />I am glad this is getting resolved and I would not have kept the money but I would haven't made the sale either. To me it becomes a matter of principle and I am not going to sell you something you want when you have wronged me in the past.<br /><br />The eyesight is not an excuse and I hope all parties are happy with the resolution.<br /><br />I also want to say that Leon is top notch to work with people on things like this especially when it really doesn't impact him at all.<br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

What would you do?
 

Posted By: <b>Jerry Hrechka</b><p> Leon, with all the work you do on this Forum, you could triple the existing membership fees and I would gladly pay them.<br /> But all kidding aside, this place is actually worth paying a membership fee.