Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Sandiegowill</b><p>RE-POST OF MESSAGE WITH TITLE AND MY NAME:<br /><br /><br />Gentlemen, input requested.<br /><br />A long time ago we ran a N162 Buffalo Bill card on Ebay, sold for about $550. We graded it as Ex to Ex+. Yesterday, 110 days later, the gentleman who won it instructed us that a spot inspection at the National by SGC deemed it "possibly" trimmed.<br /><br />As such, customer now wants to send it to PSA with the expectation that if it does not pass PSA muster then he will return it to us for a refund. Saying that happens within three weeks, that would put us at 130 days.<br /><br />The auction ended April 28. Customer paid April 29, we shipped the same day. Part of rapid shipping is so that deals stay fresh and recipient can do their part to ensure satisfaction, no? <br /><br />You all know we're strictly consignment auction. If customer had let us know within 30 days, in this case, I could have notified consignor and done something about this. My opinion is that 110 days is much too long and that at some point the buyer has to take some responsibility for their end of the bargain.<br /><br />How do I know this is even the same card?<br /><br />I acknowledge that at the time we ran this card we did not add the common sense language in our auctions to the effect that items are sold as-is, refunds can only be processed within "x" amount of days. That has been changed and our current auction information states 7 days as the time alloted for possible returns for refund, but I do admit it was not in there at the time of this sale.<br /><br />The customer in this current case is using that fact as his leverage.<br /><br />My first response to him included an offer by me to do what I could to re-sell the card on his behalf for the best net result possible. He immediately rejected that offer.<br /><br />My question to you, the hobby's arbiters of integrity, common sense and fairness, is:<br /><br />Should I have to issue a refund despite the lateness of the request?<br />Is he right, that a "trimmed card is a trimmed card" (presuming this is the same card) and that for eternity a reputable dealer will issue a refund? If not for eternity, then, for how long? 110 days? 210 days? 1,010 days?<br /><br />Will Hays <br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>When you sell a card raw - it comes with lots of implications. That is the precise reason that the graded card industry has evolved over the last 15 years - and why, especially, it creates value on Internet-based transactions.<br /><br />Being that this is the case, the buyer has an obligation within a 'reasonable' period of time to examine the card and determine if it is or is not to his/her satisfaction. What that reasonable amount of time is is debatable - but certainly anything past one month seems too long.<br /><br />I would hope that many collectors of pre-war material that are willing to spend six hundred dollars on a baseball card are at least reasonably educated as to alteration techniques and how to detect them. That being said - all major grading companies offer services that will turn around grading well within a month.<br /><br />I think that you have been more than reasonable on your end - and I think that now the seller is trying to take advantage of your good graces. You have offered reasonable ways to make amends to this situation. But it is no longer your responsibility to refund the buyer nearly four months after the initial transaction took place. We can debate "reasonable" period of time ad nauseum here - but I cannot see anyone providing any valid arguments that 100+ days is reasonable.<br /><br />Marc

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Waited too long no refund for you! <br /><br />All kidding aside I think you have been more than fair. This is the problem I have with the hobby since the advent of grading companies. As a buyer of cards buyers should educate themselves on the material they are planning to purchase. A buyer must take some responsibility regarding their purchase, which means buying un-graded cards for a fraction of the price of a graded example and expecting no surprises is just plain silly. <br /><br />I’m also a firm believer that grading companies make mistakes, sometimes the seller is correct and in fact cards may not be altered, and that the seller has every right not to offer refunds based on third party opinions, which in many ways is exactly what it is an opinion.<br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>I do think that sellers should offer refunds if requested within a reasonable time (if the reason is legitimate) - however, I agree that if you, as a buyer, sit on your hands and do nothing for 100+ days, you cant then complain that the seller wont issue a refund. This is true whether you have included disclaimer-type language in your listing or not. I challenge the buyer in this case to find me one retail store that will let you take home an item and then return it four months later, with or without the receipt.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>"...our current auction information states 7 days as the time alloted for possible returns for refund, but I do admit it was not in there at the time of this sale."<br /><br />I think 7 days is insufficient time for a return because in most cases it will take longer than that for a turn around to a grading service unless you use an overnight which costs much more than the standard service. Could you try 30 days? You are kind of caught up in this because you have consigners that want to be paid ASAP (probably). I wish I had an answer for that but I don't.<br /><br />To answer your question - 110 days is a really long time. There's a few things to consider here: <br /><br />1) You have a good reputation and sometimes it's just good business to bite the bullet.<br /><br />2) This isn't a $50 or even a $100 item. Thank goodness it's not in the thousands of $$.<br /><br /><br />Suggestions: <br /><br />You could bite the bullet (buy it back minus the shipping and ebay costs) and see if passes one of the grading services (which will pretty much reinforce everyones feelings about these services if it grades ok) or you could see if one of the services will give it the AUTHENTIC designation and sell it for about 1/2 of what it sold for initially and defray the cost of a loss. This would confirm your stature as a more than reputable seller and probably keep this person as an active bidder in your auctions. I have a feeling that this may not be a regular bidder, just a guess.<br /><br />Lose the client by telling the person that 110 days is a bit much and that it's not a reasonable time frame. Also get ready for the person to possibly trash you. At least they can't leave a negative on ebay for you. You save the money (probably, rightfully so) but you also create a possible headache which will hopefully not damage your good reputation. <br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>we're now the "arbiters of integrity, common sense and fairness". Not entirely sure that I want to be part of such a burden-laden group.<br /><br />Anyway....I agree with Marc.....your offer to resell the card is more than fair. I've bought from you quite a few times and each transaction was more than satisfactory. Most, if not all, the cards were ungraded. It's basically implied that if you buy a raw card on ebay, you gets what you pays for. If you buy a raw card, expecting it to grade a '6' and you pay raw '3' prices for it, it might not grade or it might grade a '3' or '4'. Just part of the game. If you want a guaranteed '6', buy a '6'.<br /><br />While you didn't say that all sales are as is or final within 7 days in your ad, you also did not guarantee explicitly that the card was untrimmed either--right? I've had NUMEROUS cards that were rejected by one company as 'possibly' trimmed graded by the other (SGC vs. PSA). I've had cards rejected by SGC as trimmed graded by same at a later time. Same for PSA. As I see it, it's not an exact science..........<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Bryan Long</b><p>The seller waited way too long. No refund!

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Personally, I dont think Will really needs to worry about his rep too much around here regardless of what he does. <br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Since I am the one that bought the card please read all email <br />correspondence below:<br /><br />Sent Aug 16 2:27pm by me - <br />Hi Will, I went to the National 2 weeks ago and submitted the N162 Buffalo Bill to SGC and today they deemed it trimmed. I'll look at it more closely when I get it back and if it looks ok I'll submit it to PSA just to see what they think. If they deem it trimmed I'd like to return it for a refund. I'll keep you up to date as to when I submit it to PSA and such. Thanks. Brent<br /><br />Reply from Will - <br />Hello Brent, We are long past the point of accepting a returned item for a refund but we can help you do something with the card, re-sell, if you do return it.<br />Regards, Will<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Sent by me Aug 17, 6:17am<br />Will, if a card is trimmed its trimmed. Its not like I'm returning it because of buyer's remorse. You are a well known dealer and well respected and so I decided to wait until I went to the National to submit it. You advertised the card as ex to ex+ and maybe even ex/mt. Why would I try to resell the card as trimmed and lose big money because it was not disclosed that it was trimmed? Its only a little over 3 months that I purchased this card from you which is not that long ago. The auction still shows up on Ebay. If this is your stance than I would like to return it immediately upon return from SGC for the refund and not try the PSA route. Please let me know something today. Here is the link:<br /> <br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6172948196&ssPageName= ADME:B:EOAB:US:6" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6172948196&ssPageName= ADME:B:EOAB:US:6</a><br /> <br />Regards<br />Brent<br /><br />Reply from Will - <br /><br />It's too late Brent, but if you want me to help you on the next step I'll do what I can.<br /><br />Response from me 9:13am, Aug17 - <br />What would be the next step? I can't believe as a respected dealer you won't back your material any better. You have no guidelines listed on your Ebay listings and there is no 30 day, 60 day or 90 day time limit for mail fraud/small claims cases selling altered cards through Ebay. Do you mind if I post our email correspondence on the Net54 forum to ask their opinion? You can call if you wish at 713-867-1977 and we can discuss this over the phone.<br /> <br />Brent<br /><br /><br />Reply - <br />Can the email. My phone number is in every listing and piece of correspondence.<br /> <br />Fine, put it to the people on Net54. Be sure to mention that you sat on it for over 100 days, that I have no way to tell if this is the same card, that you feel yourself embarrased in your actions and now wish for me to somehow bail you out. Mention those things please and I'll be interested to learn what they have to say.<br /><br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Sandiegowill</b><p>Hi Fred,<br /><br />Sober opinions - much appreciated.<br /><br />I agree with time issue and will change language from 7 days to 30 on card-grading issues only. 7 days should still be adequate for memorabilia, but I also agree that 30 days is more appropriate for grading issues.<br /><br />Thanks for the input on that - should be an improvement to our service.<br /><br />My latest offer to the customer was this:<br /><br />Send the card to me. I will see if I can get it into a holder. If not, I will re-list it with ammended language and split the difference with this buyer.<br /><br />He said, "NO!". Am I not being reasonable?<br /><br />Oh, and then he threatened to have Adam Warshaw sue me as a result of my actions.<br /><br />Will

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>Brent:<br /><br />Since you bought the card - why did you have to wait over three months, until the National, to decide if you were satisfied with the card? Surely, you could have sent the card to SGC much before then - and, also, you had quite a bit of time to do your own, independent verification and review of the card. That you seemed to fail on both of those counts, I feel, disqualifies you from a refund. Unless you were somehow indisposed over the last three months - your choice to wait was your choice alone, and bears no consequence to the seller.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>I never threatened to sue I just simply said i would call Adam and see if there was anything i could do at a later date. i now there is a law in CA now about selling altered sportscards and i would probably just ask him for a copy of that or where to find it and file the papers myself.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Have you even read the item discription about Will inspecting it under strong magnification? I admit that I'm not a grading expert and the card looked good to me and buying from Will was good enough for me until the National. I submitted it to SGC for encapsulation and their opinion - its trimmed! If I sold you a car with a salvaged title and did not disclose that(maybe I didn't even know about it) its still no excuse and against the law. 3 months later you finally get the paperwork from teh State and they send you a salvaged title.....what do you do?<br /><br /><br />If I'm totally wrong then I'm man enough to admit it and I'll destroy the card. I'm not going to sell it and have someone later down the line go through this sort of thing again. This is the kind of stuff that makes me want to walk away from this HOBBY but I still enjoy it 99% of the time.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Jim Crandell</b><p>Will,<br /><br />Hi Will.<br /><br />I will disagree with the prevailing opinion here.<br /><br />I bought raw cards in the past and sent them in for grading YEARS later. I did have ones that came back altered and would not grade. Many of these came from bad guys who are now out of business. Some came from very reputable dealers.<br /><br />I know I am leaving some out but Greg Bussineau, Steve Novella and Gary Moser gave me full refunds years after I bought them raw. I have since repaid all these guys with tons of business.<br /><br />I don't believe you are under any legal obligation but I believe that eating the cost and giving the customer his money is the right thing to do here.<br /><br />Jim

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>Card looks to curve on the left side.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Aaron M.</b><p>I might be in the minority here, but when I offer an item everything I sell comes with a lifetime guarantee of authenticity (or in your case, the card not having been doctored). <br /><br />That protects me from "buyer's remorse" or a disagreement over condition, but leaves me responsible if an item I sell turns out to be fake. I do this especially with vintage programs and pinbacks for which reproductions abound, because I want the buyer to be confident I am selling them authentic material. <br /><br />I do this also, because that's the way I would want to be treated. <br /><br />I bought a Christy Mathewson Memorial tag from Lelands earlier this year in one of their "Fredo" auctions. These were originally issued in the 1920's, but reproductions are rampant (Scott Gaynor had been, unknowingly I believe, selling a cache of these this spring.) <br /><br />When I re-sold the item (months later) on E-Bay, the buyer upon receipt informed me that it was a reproduction. I had guaranteed authenticity in my listing, so I issued him a refund. (It was my responsibility, not Lelands, to refund the customer, since I sold it to him.)<br /><br />With the information the buyer provided, plus some detailed background information Rob Lifson provided me, I went back to Lelands (again, months later) and gave them the information. They were extremely responsive and issued me a refund within two weeks. <br /><br />To me, that was a text-book class way to respond and handle the situation. <br /><br />So, my take would be it's Sandiegowill's responsibility to issue a refund to the buyer (because he sold him a trimmed card) and then Sandiegowill should pursue collection of its funds from the consignor. (Or list the card again as trimmed and retain the proceeds.)

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>"and I'll destroy the card"<br /><br />Destroy it my way when you decide thats your best option. Yeah so grading is great for our hobby how? <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/smileys/77.gif">

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Keith O'Leary</b><p><P>you can't be serious Jim.</P><P>Gary Moser is one of the biggest scammers in the business. One of the FEW people that have ripped me off in the 30 or so years i've been collecting.</P><P>I have a bad&nbsp;taste in my mouth today. Guys like Gary Moser are bitter pills to swallow and not forgotten about.</P><P>Keith</P><P>&nbsp;</P>

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>i'm with jim and aaron....this is just common business sense.<br /> <br />i sell under bmb11 on ebay. EVERYTHING i sell (some are consignments) comes with a guarantee.<br />i also run a "real" business (pork chops...for those who care)....and it's not how you handle your everyday business, it's how you handle the problems that rarely occur....THAT'S where you make your REPUTATION.<br /><br />i'm quite sure the card is in the same condition as when you sold it, will.<br />be a GOOD BUSINESS PERSON and do the right thing.<br />it's YOUR reputation.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>I agree that the time is too long in between purchase and unless those 2 have done alot of business in the past theres no way to tell if Will is going to get the exact same card back he sold in the same condition.My brother sold a card on ebay,the buyer complained about the condition so after working out a deal the guy sent back an obviously different card(same card,worse condition,centered different) then left my brother a negative on the deal,got another ebay name and bought something and left another negative.I dont know this particular buyer so im not accusing him of trying to do this just saying what ive seen happen.<br /><br />Will is a great seller so i cant see his reputation taking a hit here,especially after his offer to resell.I do agree with Fred that his return policy should be a little longer than 7 days.<br /><br />If i were a seller i wouldnt even consider a return after 110 days unless it was someone i knew on a personal level.As a buyer i would notify the seller and if he didnt make some kind of offer(like selling the card for me on ebay) i would tell them i would no longer be purchasing from them,but still after that long a time id just consider it my own fault for waiting.<br /><br />As an 18 year old Dave Chappelle said "When you lose,dont lose the lesson"

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>I know and respect both the buyer and seller of this card, so I see both sides and feel for everyone involved.<br /><br />If Will had said something in his auction about the card "maybe" being trimmed... then I agree that Brent would have been obligated to send it in to SGC for verification AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. In this situation, Brent reasonably assumed the card was good and that there was no real reason for an inspection.<br /><br />But, since Will truly believed that the card was legitimate when he sold it... putting some sort of "disclaimer" on his auction page would have probably scared off any buyers. It would have sounded like the old story we always see about "don't know if it is good so am selling as is." Should Will have had to "sabotage" his own auction just to cover this remote possibility?<br /><br />I do agree that 7 days for return is NOT long enough.<br /><br />I also agree that a "consignor" is screwed if 100 days has passed and he already sent payment to the original owner.<br /><br />Then again, a consignment show with less reputation than Will could clearly take advantage of this by selling trimmed cards for a third party and then saying "too bad, I already paid them."<br /><br />Tough situation.<br /><br />Clearly NOT just a simple case of "buyer's remorse" by Brent... but also not really Will's fault that the inspection was not done sooner.<br /><br />Then again, logic might dictate that Brent paid LESS for the card in Will's auction than he would have if it had already been graded and inspected. <br /><br />Thus, as we have discussed before... anyone buying an ungraded card is KNOWINGLY taking a risk... and anyone selling one is KNOWINGLY selling for a little less than top dollar.<br /><br />So in actuality, BOTH the buyer and seller knew that there was a POSSIBILITY that the card was trimmed.<br /><br />This is DIFFERENT than this situation previously where someone bought a GRADED card and then sent it in to another grading company and had it rejected for trimming. If a seller sells a GRADED card... then I agree that there is no refund.<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>to specifically answer will's question....if you are selling raw cards, you must be willing to accept return (provided the card has been altered) for ETERNITY. no doubt in my mind.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I think that as a consignee you have to limit the time of a refund. 30 days sounds fair. I don't think either the buyer or seller are at total fault here. Here's my possible solution to the matter.<br /><br />Take the card back.....re-sell it on ebay as possibly trimmed ( I don't think it was confirmed yet but if it was then sell it as trimmed). Take that money into account, split the difference, and chalk it up to a lesson learned.....<br /><br />regards

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>WP</b><p>Will,<br /> I don't really have an opinion on this matter but I will suggest that you set up some firm guidelines for the return of graded cards if rejected from grading services in the future. For example 45 days from date of auction closure and an email informing you that the buyer is taking advantage of this policy. This will give you the opportunity to keep a scan of the card and delay paying the consignor until the date has elapsed.<br /> My gut on this matter is that you are not obligated to take the card back but should consider working something out with the buyer in an attempt to keep the client. The idea that a lifetime guaranty applies is rediculous.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>If you sell raw cards - you have to be willing to accept returns for Eternity?!<br /><br />Isn't that a bid ridiculous, Andy? There is so much that can be done to a card after it leaves the seller that there is virtually no way to assure that it has not been funked with after the seller shipped the card. Much of the trimming that takes place in the hobby today is trimming of 1/32" or less on a single edge of a card. <br /><br />The seller provided ample scans - and I think Will would have readily refunded the card had it come up within 4-6 weeks of the end of the auction. But once you say that a raw card must come with a "lifetime guarantee of authenticity" or some garbage like that - the only way a seller can ensure nothing has been done after-the-fact is if the card is encapsulated in a tamper-proof container. Which is all a graded-card holder is, at its essence.<br /><br />Yes - the description on the item does talk about looking at the card under magnification. But the buyer had the same opportunity to look at it under the same magnification after buying. I think the seller has made initiatives here to resolve the situation - but a 100% refund after 4 months just doesn't strike me as reasonable.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>To me this is like buying a demo car from a dealer, you pick the car up and drive it around for a few months, only to notice a big scratch down the side of the car. Then roll back into the dealership point out the scratch and request a new Corvette or your money back. <br /><br />You knew you were buying an un-graded card at fraction of the price a graded example would bring. You have had plenty of time to review the card and return to the seller if unsatisfied. <br /><br />“If you are selling raw cards, you must be willing to accept return (provided the card has been altered) for ETERNITY.”<br /><br />Are you serious Andy? Lifetime guarantee is Will Ron Popeil? <br /><br />Here’s my take on that.<br /><br />If you are buying raw cards know the sellers return policy, discuss this before purchasing, know what your buying and be prepared that your great deal may not be so great after all. Buyers need to take responsibility; as well it’s not a one-way street. <br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Buying and selling RAW cards is a risk for everyone.<br /><br />Then again, there is a potential benefit for everyone.<br /><br />A buyer may get a legitimate card for less than what it is worth when it is slabbed later... but a buyer may also get a worthless trimmed card.<br /><br />A seller may spend $20 to get a card slabbed that was perfectly fine and did NOT need slabbing... but he may be glad he did so later when the card sells for top dollar and cannot be returned for a refund.<br /><br />These are the KNOWN risks and rewards of raw cards.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>If you return the monies to the gent and put the card back up on eBay and this time around only fetches $150 in trimmed form, Will loses out a large chunk of the monies made through the original consignment. <br /><br />I think both Will and Brent are at fault. Will for not being more clear (I see nowhere on his page about returns) and Brent for waiting so long to have the thing graded. I have purchased from Will and found him to be an excellent, stress-free seller.<br /><br />I also think that Brent is being unreasonable here in rejecting all of Will's offers and not realizing that the tardy nature of having the item graded took so long was actually partly his fault. If he had it graded right away, I'm sure Will would have been able to get this cleared up ASAP. Brent's not being Terrell Owens unreasonable, but not taking responsibility that this is partly his fault. But then again, Will didn't disclose his return policies and also that when you buy a raw cards, I guess it comes with the territory that this may occur. I give up. Does Judge Wapner read the VBC Forum?<br /><br />What would SCGaynor do in this instance? Another consignment based company.<br /><br />DJ<br /><br />DJ

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>I thought I'd weigh in on a few points:<br /><br />1. The card looks trimmed at the bottom left from the scan, pretty obviously so. Since I collect western stuff and love this card, I think I may have passed on this one for that reason. <br /><br />2. PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY IT. Even if it is trimmed, it is still an authentic, tough, highly desirable 19th century issue that will find a good home somewhere if you don't kill it. I paid about $75 for a PSA 1 that is a mess and I'd rather have an authentic slightly trimmed card like this one than the one I have now, so it is marketable at some price, especially if a legitimate grading service encapsulates it as authentic. <br /><br />3. Here is the altered cards law:<br /><br />§ 21670. Definitions<br />For purposes of this article, the following definitions apply:<br />(a) "Altered or refurbished" means repair work which has been performed to enhance the value of the sports trading card as a collectible. This work includes, but is not limited to, filling in holes, building new corners, ironing out creases, or touching up the pictures or borders on the sports trading card.<br /><br />§ 21671. Alterations or refurbishments; certificates; violations; penalties<br />(a) Any sports trading card that is altered or refurbished shall be accompanied by a certificate stating the exact work done to the sports trading card, the date the work was performed, the cost of that work, and the name, phone number, and address of the person who performed the work.<br />(b) Any person or agent thereof, who KNOWINGLY [emphasis added] sells or trades a sports card in violation of subdivision (a), shall both:<br />(1) Refund to the buyer, the full amount paid for the altered or refurbished sports trading card or the full retail value of any nonmonetary consideration received in exchange for the altered or refurbished sports trading card, or both.<br />(2) Be liable to the buyer for a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation. Each card sold represents a separate and distinct violation.<br /><br />No one is accusing Will of knowingly selling an altered card, so I think Brent would have an uphill battle using this law to get his money back. He might still have some remedy under implied warranty law. More to the point, we are talking relatively small $$ here and two reputable people, so it seems to me that talking law isn't the way to go. Brent, why not let Will sell the card for you at no commission with a disclosure that it appears trimmed and see what it brings? Will, after reading your listing I feel that you should stand behind the card and refund the difference between the subsequent sale price and the price Brent paid. And you may want to hire a lawyer (plug, plug) to draft a tag for your auctions that will comprehensively cover returns and similar situations so that an unscrupulous buyer (not you Brent; I am talking hypothetically) will not put you into a similar position.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>This card was NOT bought at a highly reduced rate. If this card graded a 60(ex) as I expected it would probably sell for $700-900 on Ebay My snipe was actually set for around $750 if I remember correctly. Its not like I was buying this card at a "reduced rate" trying to make a buck! I bought it because I wanted it for my collection. An unaltered one! If Will had listed a return policy I would have sent the card to SGC within a week. Again, I thought delivering the card in person at the National was fine especially since I bought it from a high profile dealer. I guess my lesson learned is to submit weekly and there 5 business day turnaround????<br /><br />The analogy about the demo car with a scratch was pretty off base as well BUT the one I used about unkowingly buying a car with a salvalged title is a little more on topic.<br /><br />I'm not trying to ruin anyone's reputation here. I just feel like I'm right in asking for a refund and Will feels like he's right in declining it.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>i'm very serious. as a seller, you know damn well if the card "appears" to be altered or not. and if you sell it raw with no disclaimer....then you are certainly obligated to accept a return, if it is proven to have been altered.<br />one of two things apply here, either will is accusing the buyer of switching/altering the card or not.<br />and if he's not accusing him of "foul play"....then a refund is in order.<br />i know i would take the card back, under the circumstances.<br />i sell mostly graded cards just for that reason.<br />and from a business standpoint, any loss is the associated cost of doing business....and that burden should fall on the seller, not his customer.<br /><br />here's a real story, sold a b18 stengal on ebay....seller contacted me, never received the item. he contacted me, no less than a month after i shipped it (i emailed him the day it was shipped).<br />i offered a full refund, chalked it up to lost mail....what else is a seller to do? tell my customer, go take a leap? it just doesn't make business sense....something many card dealers are lacking in....<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Zach</b><p> Both are at fault in my opinion. Will for selling a trimmed card and brent for wait 100 days to get it graded. Lots of people have return policies but 100 days is just way to long to ask for a return.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Not that mine is the correct solution, or if Will would accept it, but would you accept it if he did? I think it mitigates the circumstances ( I probably screwed the use of that term up) in this case, financially. Neither of you are bad guys......this is just a bad situation.....

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Bryan</b><p>I bought a game used jersey for a couple hundred dollars and waited two months to open the package (my grandmother gave me money to buy something for myself for my birthday. I didn't open the package until the actual day.) When I opened it I found the jersey altered. I didn't even bother contacting the seller who happened to be a big sports memorabilia dealer. IT WAS MY FAULT for not inspecting it in a timely manner.<br /><br />There is a such thing as being a good buyer too. Waiting over 3 months to return something is not kosher. If you choose to buy a raw card be prepared to act upon it. Look it over, get it inspected.<br /><br />The seller is not responsible for protecting buyers from themselves.<br /><br />I agree 7 days is too short. Should be a 30 day return policy.<br /><br /><br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>When you buy a raw card, you normally pay less precisely because it is not graded and you know you are taking a risk. When you buy from a reputable seller, you are normally willing to pay more precisely because of their reputation. Nothwithstanding that some sellers have a lifetime guarantee (such as Andy) I would never presume that to be the case and although I don't know where I would cut it off, clearly IMO 110 days is past this warranty period. <br />I think Will has shown a willingness to be reasonable in this matter. Although, I don't know Brent, others have vouched for his reasonableness. I would certainly think that two reasonable people should be able to resolve this matter and move on. Leon's suggested compromise is the same one that I was originally thinking should work, and I would be my opinion that the two sides in this matter try to reach an agreement around that basic framework.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>joe brennan</b><p> I dont remember the exact case and I may be a little vague on the details, but I do recall the purchase of a 52 mantle that had been altered, I.e colored. It was put in a safe for a very long time and brought out for grading and deemed altered. The case went to court and the judge ruled in favor of the buyer and that it was the brokers, auction houses, reponsibility to refund the buyer. If I deal with a reputable auction house or broker, unless noted, I feel that the card should be guaranteed for life. I would hate to buy a Piccasso from the such and 2 years later found out it was a fake and the broker says, Sorry only a 30 day guarranty. Just my 2 cents. Joe<br><br>"I had the right to remain silent. I just didn't have the ability" Ron White

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Jay Miller</b><p>Seems to me like the buyer had ample opportunity to inspect the card during the last 100+ days and at this point I believe that anything that Will gives him is a nice gesture but unnecessary. If there was a question as to the card being doctored the buyer should have raised it when he received the card. If he does not have the knowledge to know a doctored card from a sound card he should be learning before he buys or only buying cards slabbed by reputable grading agencies. Consider this a rather expensive education. The buyer should ask himself at this point if he feels qualified to tell a trimmed card from a sound card. If the answer is yes then this situation should not arise again. If the answer is no then he paid his tuition for nothing.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Howie</b><p>First off you have to positively identify if the card has been trimmed or if it's just an odd miscut that the grading company didn't want to grade. Sometimes they'll lump them in the trimmed reason for not grading. A better explanation of why this card wasn't graded should be sought. The odd cut could be a result of a miscut and not a trim job. Trimmed=Refund and Miscut=No Refund.<br /><br />Second, the issue that the card might be switched or modified really isn't in question. A great picture of the card is still seen on Ebay. Look and compare, it's either the same or it's not.<br /><br />Third, you just can't plead "just a broker" anytime something like this comes back and bights you. You're responsible for what goes through you. Your customers are buying based on your excellent reputation and assume you know about what you're selling.<br /><br />Fourth, California law explained by somebody else above.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>hoytdunk</b><p>Situations like this is tricky, especially if it not a regular customer. This is why I don't sell nice raw cards online. Knock on wood, I only had two cards attempted to be returned from show sales in 14 years.<br /><br />From a dealers perspective (I know this won't be popular with collectors) but food for thought, the card was sold as Ex to Ex+. If it was graded and it came back a 6 or 6.5 would the buyer call Will up and offer more money since the card graded higher than advertised?

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>I feel like I can tell the difference and though I did not look at this card under magnification it looked fine. That's why my first email to Will stated I would get a second opinion and then things escalated from there because he just simply stated "it's been too long" and then questioned my integrity about possibly swapping cards. I will gladly send this card to a resident expert on the board and if he/she(Julie) feels this card is good I will accept that and just assume the SGC grader was having a bad day BUT right now the score is 1 to 1 since obviously Will's grading doesn't count. I only say Will's opinion doesn't count because it seems half the board feels the sole responsibility of authenticating/grading/handling/reviewing is entirely placed on the buyer if the seller decides to leave his disclaimers/policies out of the auction description. At least this ordeal has caused Will Hayes to modify his policy!<br /><br />Leon, you live nearby.....want to review it when I get it back from SGC?<br /><br />Since I'm somewhat pissed right now after having my integrity questioned and my "I don't have time for this crap(Will Hayes comments)" phone call to Will I'm going to think about it overnight and I'll decide what to do tomorrow.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Howie, card is trimmed because I had a caramel card in the same submission that they listed as miscut. This is all from the online results that were posted.<br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>Interesting comment there, Brent. Seller said the card looked fine. You said the card looked fine. It was only after the grading card company got involved that it became problematic.<br /><br />Certainly salient issues have been raised here as to whether or not the card was fine simply based on the scan of the card. That being said - we've all heard numerous incidences of PSA or SGC not grading a card that was either pulled by the submitter out of a pack or experts have agreed that the card may have a funky period cut - but still be an original factory cut.<br /><br />~ms<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am no expert on trimming but can tell as much as the next addicted collector of 9 years. I would be glad to take a gander but I honestly don't think that's the solution. I don't think Will intentionally questioned YOUR integrity he just stated a fact that after this long something could have happened. I doubt he (or really myself either) knows you that well. I usually trust folks until they give me reason not to....to a certain degree. In other words I will trust someone with $100 that I don't know too well....but if it's $10,000 then I am more cautious. Limited liability I guess. These types of cards have unique characteristics so the bait and switch would just be stupid. I still think that, after the card could be sold for a ballpark area of $100, and the difference is about $200 a piece...then that's the best solution. I think there is a little fault on both sides....and this is how I would handle it...but it's ya'lls matter and could get to be more of a point of principle than dollars.....I hope this works out for both of you...

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Al Crisafulli</b><p>My opinion on this - and granted, I'm new here on this board - is that the seller is not obligated to take back the card.<br /><br />However, and this is a BIG "however", this hobby - particularly with 19th century cards - is driven by a smallish group of collectors who share their experiences with one another online.<br /><br />Lots of dealers have taken serious losses in sales over the years by developing shady reputations.<br /><br />Even the most reputable card sellers and auction houses are only one or two negative customer experiences away from being lumped in with the unscrupulous sellers that all of us know very well.<br /><br />If I were a card seller, I would be eager to eat a $550 sale, rather than run the risk of having a person telling everyone that I sold him a trimmed card and wouldn't take it back. Regardless of the circumstances. It just seems like good business to me.<br /><br />If I purchase a raw card - and almost EVERY card I purchase is raw - I still expect it to be the WHOLE card. No alterations, no trimming, no recoloring, no fakes. If the card is not described as having been altered, then the supposition is that it hasn't been. Regardless of how long the buyer took to get it graded shouldn't matter. What happens if the buyer NEVER got it graded, and three months later, he bought another card from the same set, compared them, and realized the first one was trimmed? What happens if the buyer was new to the hobby and didn't know how to identify a trimmed card, but, upon learning, realized the problem?<br /><br />If I were in the buyer's shoes, my opinion would be that the above-board dealers who will take that card back three months later are the ones I will go out of my way to buy from in the future. The ones who are steadfast in their refusal? I'd probably not buy from them ever again. <br /><br />-Al

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>Alterations can be tough to spot, but if you have any thoughts at ever having a card graded, then you should examine it super-closely and send it in soon after the deal, especially when you have purchased from someone like Will who sells on consignment. That way Will has the ability to go back to the person he received the card from. <br /><br />At least Will responded to emails and came to this board for advice - that just further confirms our already solid opinions of him.<br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>R. Cook</b><p>Who in he.. would pay over $500 to buy a card of Buffalo Bill in a gay pose?<br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Kidding aside, the card looks trimmed to me.<br />I think Leon's solution is fair for both buyer and seller.<br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>The card definitely bows out on one side.<br /><br />This is why nobody would slab my Broadleaf 460 card... and it ended up having to go in an "Authentic" slab.<br /><br />BUT...<br /><br />does the "curved edge" mean that Will should have noticed it and stated this clearly in his auction...<br /><br />or that Brent should have noticed it and send the card in sooner for inspection?<br /><br />Maybe neither... maybe both?

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Charlie O'Neal</b><p>If the seller still had the contact information why not just contact the person that owned the card when it was sold and explain the situation. Maybe and this is a big maybe they would be willing to work something out. To me this incident involves 3 parties not just 2. <br /><br /> If this was stated somewhere earlier sorry I didn't read all the way thru.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>"I'm somewhat pissed right now after having my integrity questioned"<br /><br />Brent - I dont think anyone has questioned your integrity. In fact, several people have vouched for it. As for your car title example, its not on point unless you are implying that Will knew the card was trimmed and didnt disclose that fact. I doubt that this is the case as Ive seen enough of Will's listings to know that he routinely identifies cards that he believes to be trimmed.<br /><br />"guarantee for eternity"<br /><br />wow, I suspect any the scammers who lurk on this board will be purchasing from you, trimming and returning any they cant sneak past psa. In the past, they had to send those cards to pro. This is a joke (hopefully) but it is intended to make a point - an eternal guarantee is begging to be abused. That would be the main reason you dont see a sign at your local best buy that says "all sales are final after eternity".<br /><br />Bottom Line - I think if a buyer waits four months before asking for a return and the seller says no (policy or not), the only person the buyer has to blame is himself. Here, at least a compromise has been suggested. Refusing any attempt at a compromise adds to the unreasonableness.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Financially, the offer isn't unreasonable BUT what about the guy 5 years down the road that buys this card as ex to ex+?<br /><br />When I mentioned "my integrity being questioned" it was solely based off the 3rd email from Will referencing card swapping and not at the board.<br /><br />"guarantee for eternity" was not my comment.<br /><br />Again, let me think about it and get the card back from SGC before I decide exactly what is right.<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Just for educations sake, can we see a scan of this card.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>josh, i know you are kidding, and i know i am exposing myself (not litterally, that would be bad <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> )...but i, and many other reputable sellers would take a card back after an extended period.<br />will hayes is in that catagory (reputable sellers)...that's why i'm a little suprised at his response.<br />i echo al's comment above. though al, you said it much better than i could've. <br />i also agree that an effort should be made by will to contact the consignor. seems like the least he could do.<br />in the overall scope of business, this topic should have never digressed to a thread in an open forum. it's just bad business, regardless of personal feelings.<br /><br /><br />edited to add.....brent, josh is reffering to me....and my eternal guarantee.<br />many dealers have one, most won't say it....for reasons josh mentioned above.<br />one thing i'd like to add, for those who don't know me....i'm a collector first, and a dealer second. as a dealer, i try to treat collectors as i would want to be treated.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Brent, I think the suggestion was to get that card graded by sgc/psa/gai as authentic. at least that way future purchasers are protected (unless, of course, a dishonest person buys it and cracks it out).<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>As far as returns go, I feel that the buyer should be able to on his own (or with the help of friends) determine if the grade is acceptable within a short period of time. Meaning, if a collector need three months time and a pro grader to judge the grade, the buyer should find a different hobby. The same goes for obvious defects (pen mark across back)<br /><br />However, if the issue is counterfeiting or forgery, where the opinion of an outside expert may be needed, that's a different situation. The seller should give refund for counterfiets.<br /><br />If it's a case of a fake being returned, the consignor would be largely, or at least partially, be responsible for the refund. As the auctioneer never owns the item, and takes only a small portion of the sales price, it should not be expected that the refund fully from the pockets of the auctioneer.<br /><br />It is also the responsibility of the buyer to do things in a timely fashion. Even if a dealer allows return for time infinity, the collector can do better than wait for three years to complain the grade.<br /><br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Keith,<br /><br />I bought several hundred raw cards from Gary 8-10 years ago. One or two of these would not grade. He reimbursed me years later for these cards.<br />I make no judgment on anything else associated with Gary.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Sandiegowill</b><p>Thanks for all of your input. More than I expected but of excellent quality and impressively rational (remember - I live on Ebay and folks there aren't always so cogent).<br /><br />I have contacted Brent and proposed the following solution:<br /><br />Continue in your plan & submit the card to PSA. If it comes back as altered, then please return it to me with both flips, the one from SGC and the one from PSA. Then, we will issue a refund if that is the case.<br /><br />Note from Will:<br /><br />I learned a lot today from the entries made on the thread. We will ammend our return policies to read as 30 days for card-grading issues and 14 days for anything else (you know, we've only had about ten items returned in the 6+ years we've been doing this so that is not a huge issue).<br /><br />Furthermore, we are grateful to have heard the many comments regarding both our service and reputation and, more importantly, how collectors perceive the importance of these integral issues. This knowledge can only be of benefit to our business.<br /><br />While the large majority of comments in this thread supported our initial position, our conclusion is intended to convey a committed partnership with all of our customers. I very much appreciate the four phone calls made to my office from readers of the thread, all of whom urged us to strongly stick to our stance, as well as the large volume of notes sent directly to my email and kept private urging the same thing. Our decision was not made to downplay those contributions, only to attempt to make the most people happy as possible.<br /><br />Kindest regards and good luck in tonight's Mastro sale!<br /><br />Will Hays

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Tom L.</b><p>Comment: I purchased 2 U.S. Caramels from Alan Hager back around 1992. Both came back as trimmed from SGC years later. Hager was out of business by then, and my loss, right? Well, when I saw him on EBay a couple of years ago, I contacted him about the cards. His response: send them back for a full refund. I'll be damned if I didn't get a full refund from him within a week (I can't remember the amount now, but it was around $800). I know he has taken a lot of [well-deserved] punches in the hobby, including from me, but that was a much better response than I have gotten from several other dealers with great reputations on this board (and under circumstances where a refund was completely warranted under any reasonable definition). I had no reason to expect a refund, yet he provided one almost 10 years later. Just a data point . . .<br /><br />Question for Adam: <br />Under California law, how do you ever prove that the bad act was "knowing" on the part of the seller? Does the fact that someone is a long-time dealer give a presumption of knowledge that the dealer would have to refute? <br /><br />Thanks,<br />Tom<br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Will,<br /><br />Thats a classy move and frankly one I would have expected from a dealer with as much integrity as yourself.<br /><br />Look forward to doing more business in the future.<br /><br />Jim

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Jim Clarke</b><p>Will, <br /><br />I won some high end cards from Will a year or two ago. He had some issues with his auctions then regarding payment though pay-pal. Will gave me a hard time about it after I pointed it out to him, and then he TRIED TO CHARGE ME THE PAYPAL FEES! That is a violation of their rules and I would have turned him in if I was not talked out of it from a few other board members. My one and only expierence with him was not good and he does not see any of my action anymore... <br /><br />With that being said... A GOOD dealer would go out of his way to make a repeat or any customer happy. Will likes to play it by his rules and NOT follow industry leaders. That is up to him and I do not fault him for that.. I just know it won't effect me in anyway... <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> JC<br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>As long as we are sharing stories, some of you may remember not to long ago I won a psa 3 e95 plank that SGC deemed to be trimmed when I tried to cross it over. Despite the fact that the card was never cracked out of the psa slab and could have been resold for nearly the full amount that I paid (I know b/c I did so with full disclosure), the seller, bbcardstor, refused to take the card back and issue me a refund. <br /><br />His listing had a no refund disclaimer, however, he didnt grasp the concept that a happy customer is a repeat customer. For my troubles, I lost about $50 on the card and bbcardstor banned me from bidding on his auctions (as if I would anymore).

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>barry arnold</b><p>Top drawer decision, Will.<br />I, too, have bought from you on occasion and have always been pleased.<br />I knew that wisdom would rise to the top after the astute incubation<br />and reflection of this fine board helped sort things out.<br /><br />all the best<br /><br />Barry Arnold

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>I bought some Cracker Jacks from Wil Hays and he stated that he would "go out of his way" to say that they were factory miscut and not trimmed, well certainly they were TRIMMED and when I called stating that they were sent in and came back that way.... w/o even mentioning that I was holding him at all responsible ,he snapped at me.<br /><br />Well ,whether or not you are just the consignor or not , YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE and I too WIL, from that point am done and sure you could care less !....not to mention that I paid to have you overnight them and you's botched that too !!!<br /><br />Did you bring this to light as a newly found consious?<br /><br /><br /><br />

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Al Crisafulli</b><p>Will:<br /><br />That was a pretty classy gesture.<br /><br />-Al

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>integrity and honesty are what is most important. Our comments and expieriences are based on just that. <br /><br />What was the initial gain to open these can of worms?...uh, rectify a situation to sell more cards ?<br /><br />I suppose you think that it is okay to treat a person rudly just for buying cards from them ? <br /><br />You blow 500 bucks on altered cards and you'll feel the same way.<br /><br />My cards were sent to the big 3 - the experts from all say no ,so why would one risk stating that they thought they were factory mis-cut?<br /><br /><br />I took the chance and failed , but I didnt expect to get jumped on when I called.<br /><br /><br />We have rights to our feelings and like in all things you win some and you lose some . My opinion is that he feels he shouldn't have to lose anything ever ,if so...the matter could have been resolved 50 post replies earlier !

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Al Crisafulli</b><p>Dan, I edited my post almost immediately after I wrote it, but yes, I feel that way.<br /><br />Someone posted a very specific question about how to handle a very specific situation for one particular customer, and a lot of people chimed in with feedback. The person who made the post made a decision based on some of that feedback. Problem resolved, and in my opinion, it was resolved the right way.<br /><br />I understand you have had an experience as well, but my opinion is that the person who started this thread did so to get some specific feedback about a specific situation, and not to open up the floodgates to every dissatisfied customer who reads this board.<br /><br />Like I said, I edited the post almost immediately after I wrote it, so as not to offend anyone, but I do believe what I wrote. I understand that this board is a community, and I am a very new part of it with very few people here who know me, so I'm sorry if I stepped on any toes.<br /><br />-Al

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>Charlie - You said that to you it involved 3 people. Actually, if you use that logic, it involves everyone up to the point that it was trimmed, which might have been before any of us were born.<br /><br />But if the buyer had contacted Will quickly, Will could have told the consignor before he paid him, or if a consignor wasn't involved, Will could have had a better shot at getting a refund. But again, how far back can you realistically go?<br /><br />Also, I think there is a difference between how a dealer (especially a high-volume dealer) handles these situations, and how a collector does. If I unknowlingly purchased a trimmed card and sold it to a collector who also missed the trim, then three months later he wanted a refund, it would be a problem for anything over a few hundred bucks...because I am NOT a dealer. A dealer, on the other hand, should probably go above and beyond, and probably can afford to do so.<br /><br />David - I like your logic regarding forgeries. Only wish the "respected" dealer who sold me mine saw it that way as well. Instead, no response whatsoever to my emails. In this case, I have made a point of telling every collector I think might possibly buy from him that he sells forgeries and ignores emails - definitely hurt him worse than the $240 he took from me. I won't post his name on this board, but believe me - the word is getting around.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Brent Butcher</b><p>Will and I have come to an acceptable agreement and I'm sorry for having to bring this "before the board." Thanks for all of your inputs and I think both Will and I have learned something from this.<br /><br />I also appreciate the private emails from individuals supporting me.

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>was trimmed on all four sides, I should have tried to return it to Kit Youing (it was 6 months later), instead of trading it to Ben--as a trimmed card--from whom it was stolen...

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Maybe Kit wanted the evidence back so that he could never be accused of trimming...<br /><br />so maybe he stole Ben's cards?<br /><br /><img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Have ANY of Ben's cards ever shown up anywhere?

Broker Obligation
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>WILL HAYS<br /><br />During the past several years I have won many "RAW" cards<br />from you on ebay and never had a problem.<br /><br />Now, this is very interesting (and very coincidental), because<br />at the last show I set up at, I sold a collector 5 - N162 cards.<br />They were all non-BB cards, which included Buffalo Bill. All<br />five had some minor back damage, but the fronts were really<br />nice. The next day at this show this collector returns with 4<br />of the these N162 cards graded. Guess which card was rejected<br />by PSA for "evidence of trim"? You guessed it - Buffalo Bill.<br /><br />I acquired these N162's in a large collection of 19th century<br />cards from a veteran collector. Now, I know he did not tamper<br />with them and I certainly did not. And, people wonder why I am<br />turned off to the "professional grading services". As far as I<br />am concerned....grading is an ARBITRARY ART....at best.<br /><br />TEDZAN