Posted By:
Hal LewisI know and respect both the buyer and seller of this card, so I see both sides and feel for everyone involved.
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.
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?
I do agree that 7 days for return is NOT long enough.
I also agree that a "consignor" is screwed if 100 days has passed and he already sent payment to the original owner.
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."
Tough situation.
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.
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.
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.
So in actuality, BOTH the buyer and seller knew that there was a POSSIBILITY that the card was trimmed.
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.