PSA/BGS/PWCC dispute or refund thread
I thought it might be helpful as we monitor the response to the revelations to start one thread where people can post their success, or lack thereof, at requesting any of the above parties to take their card back and refund their purchase price, or for that matter to review it.
|
I’d imagine PSA and PWCC will ask impacted collectors to sign NDA’s, but I could be wrong.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's the guarantee: https://www.psacard.com/about/financialguarantee "Certain exceptions to the Guarantee apply" |
Quote:
Certain exceptions to the Guarantee apply, including, but not limited to, the following: the Guarantee does not apply to any card as to which an obvious clerical error has been made with respect to the assigned grade or description; the Guarantee does not apply to any card that has been removed from the PSA holder or any card for which the PSA holder shows evidence of tampering; the Guarantee does not apply to any card that has been environmentally damaged due to improper storage or natural disasters, such as fire and flood; the Guarantee does not apply to cards exhibiting environmental deterioration subsequent to initial grading; the Guarantee applies only to the grade assigned to the card and does not apply to the authenticity of any autograph nor the grade assigned to any autograph; and the Guarantee does not apply to, and cannot be utilized by, the original submitter (or the original submitter’s agents, employees, affiliates or representatives) of the graded card. The described exceptions are fairly comprehensive, and I wonder what PSA could hope to add that a court would enforce. In my experience when I see the phrase "including, but not limited" it refers to a somewhat specific category (e.g., nonstructural repairs) that in and itself is either reasonably self-explanatory or has a defined meaning. And even at that when I use such a term I try to list all the important examples I can think of. Here, the word "exceptions" is very broad and can mean essentially whatever PSA could want it to mean. I question whether if PSA tried to include something not already listed a court would enforce it. |
This part is bothersome.
Last line.... and the Guarantee does not apply to, and cannot be utilized by, the original submitter (or the original submitter’s agents, employees, affiliates or representatives) of the graded card. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'd imagine that PSA would potentially offer reimbursement to victims contingent on an NDA. I doubt anyone would refuse reimbursement and test the PSA guarantee in court. Again, I could be wrong. Some forum members have already said that they have cards and will reach out to PSA/PWCC. Have any of them provided updates? I personally have not seen them. I'm just assuming PSA and PWCC are sending out NDA's. |
Quote:
|
Focused on wrong things
Quote:
The bigger risk in my opinion is to their reputation. First risk is if the story gets out that a large portion of the cards they have graded are not the grade they assigned. If it could be proved the grading error was on purpose, that would be worse. It would compound the reputations damage if word got out that when they have made a mistake (assuming unintentional), that they don’t stand behind the Guarantee. In that case word should spread that they are both incompetent and won’t stand behind the service they were paid for. Or those who control the industry could have NYT or Forbes just issue an article that paints the collector claiming they are wronged as a crazy fringe element and the whole affair is just a matter of taste and opinion as to whether alteration and conservation are ok. Also the article might point out that some cards that are altered (like the most famous and expensive card in the world) are known to be altered but have increased in value. |
If you're Brent, and your reputation is at stake, and you're giving refunds, don't you WANT people to be talking about that?
|
I wouldn't sign an NDA, but I can see why PSA would want it.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Not sure his best road to restoring confidence is to ask us to take him at his word. We see where that's gone before. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
What no SGC?
Forged t206 and their answer "Since Forgery is a federal offense, you can contact the FBI for restitution " |
Quote:
|
Quote:
That’s exactly what PSA is counting on to limit their liability in this mess. By directing people to return their cards to the seller their hope is that the cards will be returned to the card doctor, thus allowing them to avoid liability altogether. I just called PSA about 4 cards that I have that I believe were altered and they really tried to get me to send them to the seller. I did not buy these cards from PWCC so I’m sending them straight to PSA. We’ll see how good their guarantee really is. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
That's about as dodgy as it gets. |
Quote:
I'll definitely post the outcome. I'm sending then in this week. |
You used a blacklight? To detect alterations? What a novel concept. It's a wonder the TPGers, particularly PSA and Beckett thus far, haven't figured that out. What do we pay them to do?
|
Quote:
Why take on all that additional liability when the guarantee stiffs fraudulent submitters and card doctors? If the sale never happened, the grade guarantee doesn't need to be paid out. |
Quote:
Are you going to tip them off to the alteration, or see if they even bother to check at all? |
Quote:
So, to get back to the exception in the Guarantee that prohibits the original submitter from invoking it, that exception should not have an impact upon a person who in good faith purchases a graded doctored card. It will be interesting to see what PSA does when it receives the 4 cards you are returning to them. I am not questioning that they are altered, but what is your proof? The part of the Guarantee that could cause you the most trouble is the exception that prevents you from taking them out of the slab to better examine them. That exception obviously has a valid purpose behind its insertion, but also serves a nefarious purpose -- to prevent detailed forensic examination of the card. So you could be in a Catch 22 -- unless you have before and after pics of the card, in order to prove it is doctored you might have to take it out of the slab, but if you do so, you are prevented from invoking the Guarantee. If the day should come when technology comes to the rescue and a new TPG forms using as it business model advanced forensic analysis to detect doctoring, at that point I can foresee a day of reckoning for PSA. PSA will of course rely on the "taking-out-of-the-slab prohibition" exception in the Guarantee to insure a doctored card is not examined by such advanced methods. People will scream how else can they prove the card is doctored to successfully invoke the Guarantee. It would seem inevitable at that point that a person will take the card out of the slab under circumstances (e.g., video recording) that will establish the removal was done for the sole purpose of doing a forensic examination that otherwise could not be done, and that no fraud is being perpetrated on PSA. A court, if looking to interpret the Guarantee exception as narrowly as possible, will try to find a way to rule for the victimized card owner, perhaps by ignoring the literal wording of the Guarantee and looking at the intent behind the exception. The Guarantee also provides all cases adjudicated under it must be brought in Orange County, which is John Wayne territory. I wonder if the state court in that jurisdiction would take as sympathetic a view toward such a plaintiff than would a court in a different jurisdiction. In contrast, the federal court in that circuit is regarded as a very liberal court. The Guarantee does not require that cases brought under it be brought in state court only, so whether to file in state or federal court will be an important decision the plaintiff's lawyer will need to make. |
Unless the card is sufficiently valuable to meet the federal amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction (assuming a non- California plaintiff), now $75,000, what's the basis for a federal claim?
|
What happens when PWCC runs out of money to return buyers of affective cards who request returns/refunds ? Where is their money coming from ? Is something being worked out behind the scenes with them and psa to cya ? Is psa funding them to keep up with their buy backs of bad stuff ??
Idk food for thought ?? |
On Monday I received an 8k refund from PWCC for 7 cards I returned. 3 were clearly altered (only because I found before photos) and the other 4 were on a list out there but I couldn’t find the evidence myself.
Cory Weiser |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
As to Corey's initial thoughts, I don't see any basis to speculate that a plaintiff in one of these cases would be better off in federal court if he had the choice. Too many assumptions there with no facts. |
Quote:
|
Does anyone have any dealings to report here?
|
Quote:
Or maybe you will have to wait 3 months or more to get a response because 'what choice do you have' |
No responsibility for any card doctor, they won’t be held responsible. GM is like F them Prove it I got it in a PSA Holder so up yours....you can’t touch me....nobody in the past who got caught doctoring cards has ever been charged or held criminally responsible...these guys will continue to get around this using surrogates to submit and auction houses will only take cards in holders from people with no bad history in other words doctors will have other people submit the cards to the AH for them....the cycle will continue
|
Quote:
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwo0XHcYHBM
The Hotfoot Insurance company is offering 1 million for a black eye? Sounds exactly like PSA's guarantee. |
Quote:
It is a relatively small percentage of collectors who frequent these boards, and unless the word gets out to a mass audience, the "Bad Actor Facilitators" (meaning PSA and PWCC) are largely off the hook. Perhaps word will spread a bit further in Chicago, the first week of August. |
Uffdah responded on blowout that he has been reimbursed by PWCC for his PSA 10 Musial and additional ones that were fingered.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
We have one of these Districts here. We will not even file a case if we think it might be removed there. That's been the case for 15 years. There is one sitting judge there (who was in my section in law school and who I went to strip bars with back then), one roving judge, and one Senior, who was mean as hell but would let you try your case. Been there twice, both times after being removed. Actually got the Senior Judge once, who remanded the case within a day after getting the briefs, and even my old law school buddy kicked the other case back, finally. Those districts exist. You know that they do. We both know that. The fact that they exist is, unfortunately, just a fact IMO. I wish they didn't and that everywhere was fair. But they are not. |
There are 29 federal district judges in the Central District of California. I am sure their politics and temperament cover the whole spectrum. Your generalization, to me, without much more analysis, makes no sense at all.
https://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/judges...les-procedures There are apparently even more in Orange County though I did not count how many handle commercial litigation. https://www.occourts.org/directory/j...-officers.html Again, come on. You can't cite a single fact to support your proclamation that these are the worst venues for plaintiffs in California. You haven't analyzed the question at all. |
Quote:
If you do insurance law like I do, do you want an insurance defense lawyer who you have tried cases against as your judge now? I can assure you that I don't. Some are better than others, sure. But it is still a problem. I get that whole "fair" thing. But that is often in the eye of the beholder. Justice is certainly not blind so far as I can tell. |
Peter,
Have you looked at the demographics in Orange County? I have a first cousin who lives there. My mom and most of my brothers and sisters live one county away. I have a pretty good idea of what's going on there. When I'm confused, I just talk to my cousin. Then I am back on track. |
Quote:
But I like agreeing with you, so I'll agree with your last message, the one before Orange County that is lol I can't keep up with you. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Venue written as exclusive and mandatory is a logistical decision - nothing more.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Moreover, guys who go to Orange County to pursue PSA over a baseball card are probably going to be of the same demographic you are hinting at.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now if you said, they choose Orange County because they think a judge or jury might favor an Orange County party, well that might make some sense, but that has nothing to do with the demographics of the forum or its residents or judges. I think you will find the vast majority of forum selection clauses are home base clauses. |
OC isn't nearly as conservative as it used to be. They just voted in a liberal in the Laguna/Newport district. Demographics are much different in Santa Ana than they are by the water. I know nothing about how judges in the area tend to rule, but if you're saying Santa Ana is a politically conservative area you probably haven't spent much time here.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The defense may work either way but its more solid PSA/PWCC and the like just notified everyone to look at their tainted cards potentially. Yes more claims will be submitted as well so there is risk/reward. But it appears even if the card market tanks, everyone will be paid fairly years from now and everyone will agree what their damages are from a sale the past 2 or 3 years. |
Any more refunds, or refusals, to report?
|
Honest question, doesn't this whole fiasco elevate PSA further above other third-party graders?
It's pretty clear that BGS/BVG, SGC and PSA are all having difficult times detecting altered cards. If I'm not mistaken, only PSA will make you whole for their mistakes. Has any refund been issued by SGC or Beckett? |
Quote:
PWCC has, on several occasions now, issued refunds on altered PSA cards. But I have yet to see where PSA has actually paid out a penny. Someone please correct me if this is wrong. Furthermore, most of the exposed cards are residing in PSA holders. So I fail to see the purported “elevation” of PSA over and above anyone else. They’re all flawed in different ways. But they’re all equal in terms of happily accepting money for a service that most of us could perform far better for free. |
Didnt their quarterly report say that they paid out claims from the Insurance?
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:55 AM. |