Beware Carterscards2006

[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

[FrankWakefield]

+1

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by 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

Bill, I agree, that is the most disturbing thing to me about this seller that I hadn't known about initially. I'm not 100% sure where I stand on Todd's case specifically but the shill bidding is VERY upsetting and I doubt I'll be bidding on his future items (unless I'm comfortable knowing someone is shilling me up!)

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bcornell

There have been 2 threads this week about cards he sold in holders that appear to be altered

Let's be clear. Are you saying that the seller is altering cards?

[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.

[bcornell]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Let's be clear. Are you saying that the seller is altering cards?

No, I didn't say or even imply that. The T222 Alexander was sold in the same holder in a Goodwin auction in 2006; you can look it up on their website.

I said that I would beware of buying cards in holders from this seller, I'd beware of his shilling his own auctions, and I wouldn't expect a response if I had a problem.


Bill

[iwantitiwinit]

Mea culpa i did not realize that he advertised a M101-5 and you in fact received a M101-4. Given that I retract my entire past statement.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

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.

If you really believe the card to be trimmed, shouldn't you go after the grading company and not the seller? Even if the seller was the one that submitted the card (which I don't believe is the case), he paid for a professional opinion and the mistake was made the GAI, not the seller.

Let's say you're buying a house and pay for an professional inspection. The inspection comes back okay, but a month later you find the house is infested with termites. Do you go after the seller of the house for compensation or the inspector who missed the problem?

[iwantitiwinit]

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit

I don't in any way see how any refund here is warranted. Facts: 1) You bid on and bought a graded card. 2) All pertinent facts were disclosed about the card at time of sale, ie. grading company, grade, type of card, No Refunds on graded cards, etc. 3) You received the card offered in the manner that it was offered in a untampered with holder. Fact of law - the transaction ends at this point. No warranties or guarantees were made or implied.

The fact that you chose to submit the card to another grading agency and were then not happy with the result is not germane to the previous argument. It has no bearing on the purchase/sale transaction which again was completed satisfactorily from the point of law.

Personally, I find it surprising that you are making such a fuss about this. It would be interesting to know your motivation for resubmitting the card for grading? Lastly, I wouldn't bother pursuing a lawsuit here, in my opinion you will end up being countersued and most likely be on the hook for at a minimum court costs assuming you have listed all pertinent facts that could be viewed in your favor.

Mea culpa i did not realize that he advertised a M101-5 and you in fact received a M101-4. Given that I retract my entire past statement.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bcornell

No, I didn't say or even imply that. The T222 Alexander was sold in the same holder in a Goodwin auction in 2006; you can look it up on their website.

I said that I would beware of buying cards in holders from this seller, I'd beware of his shilling his own auctions, and I wouldn't expect a response if I had a problem.


Bill

If that's not what you said or implied, then why do we need to "beware of buying cards in holders from this seller?" It sounds to me like he is selling the cards in good faith. If here were the one that submitted the cards, I could see you're point. However, that is not the case. In both cases, he is selling cards that were previously graded by another submitter. I agree with you on the shilling point. One can make up their own mind if they want to do business with them or not. But I think your comment "beware of buying cards in holders from this seller" isn't justified.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by botn

Stating No Returns, As Is or All Sales Final, means nothing any longer under the new ebay and paypal rules.

Not only that, but having a 7 day return policy means nothing now too even though ebay forces me to click on that box when I'm listing auctions. I had a guy turn me in to ebay for an item he'd had in his possession for more than 20 days before filing a claim. Ebay sided with him.

[Fred]

Just my opinion -

* The seller indicates NO RETURNS ACCEPTED.
* The card was professionally (and I use that term loosely) graded by GAI.
* The card is no longer in a TPG holder with a HIGH numerical grade.

Because it was in a TPG holder I would almost assume that the no returns is based on the fact that it was "passed" by a TPG.

I see many sellers using this same ploy/tactic - "hey, if it's in a slab then it's gotta be good". I think we all kind of know that's bull $hit.

A good seller would refund the money (if it was still in the TPG slab - which this isn't). Because the card is removed from the TPG slab I don't think the seller has any obligation to buy it back.

A knowledgable collector would know that a GAI graded card is somewhere between PRO and SGC/PSA. I wouldn't touch GAI cards unless there is a nice discount associated with it because I'm always suspicious of GAI cards (with numerical grades) possibly being trimmed. This isn't to say that SGC and PSA haven't let their share of trimmed cards be given a numerical grade, this is just my opinion that GAI has provided numerical grades to a larger percentage of trimmed cards - and that is what I consider "common knowledge" to advanced collectors.

It's a sad situation because it really makes it difficult to appreciate the hobby when something like this comes up.

Unfortunately, this is our hobby - today. People rely on TPG and swear by it when assigning a value to a card.

[slidekellyslide]

According to Todd the card is on its way back from SGC and he believes it is still in the GAI slab...with that said, I'd like to know how any TPG can tell for certain a card is trimmed if it's still in the slab.

[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.

[nolemmings]

Bill and Leon (and others), thanks again. My main purpose was to point you all to this guy as someone you need to view carefully, and I recognized that others might disagree with me on my particular situation. Thanks to Peter for unearthing the apparent shilling as well, and to Ed for pointing out a second chance offer received from this guy just hours after an auction. I believe there are several things about this seller that do not pass the smell test.

If you really believe the card to be trimmed, shouldn't you go after the grading company and not the seller? Even if the seller was the one that submitted the card (which I don't believe is the case), he paid for a professional opinion and the mistake was made the GAI, not the seller.

I'm not saying I could not go after the grading company. Nor am I saying the seller could not go against the grading company, or whoever he bought the card from, depending on the facts. More power to him if he was wronged by someone else.

Let's say you're buying a house and pay for an professional inspection. The inspection comes back okay, but a month later you find the house is infested with termites. Do you go after the seller of the house for compensation or the inspector who missed the problem?

Both. This happens frequently in the context you mention. Sellers often fail to disclose known problems which ultimately are shown to have existed for some time and with their knowledge. Buyer may go after the inspector for failing to spot the problem, but surely is not limited to that party as a defendant.

There is also an argument for the implied warranty of merchantability (or habitability with the case of a house), whereby goods must reasonably conform to an ordinary buyer's expectations, sometimes measured by standards for such goods "as pass ordinarily in the trade". In the case of cards, I submit that the standards require that any graded card with a numeric grade must be authentic and unaltered to "pass ordinarily in the hobby". As a rule, people do not buy numerically graded cards with the expectation that they have been altered.

[bobbyw8469]

I seek a refund because I received a damaged card, one that has been altered

When will all this end???? What if you sent it in to PSA, and they graded it an '8.5'.....the bottom line is you are getting differing opinions from different graders, and there is no consitency. I am still not 100% convinced the card is actually trimmed! The seller listed a GAI 7.5 graded card and delivered a GAI 7.5 graded card. To me, this is an open and shut case...tranasction over!

As a rule, people do not buy numerically graded cards with the expectation that they have been altered.

I repeat? WHO SAID THE CARD IS ALTERED?!?! SGC???? GAI SAID THE CARD IS GOOD! Send the card to PSA and then ISA for that matter. Majority wins. Right now, the score is tied 1-1....

[HBroll]

I agree with bobbyw8469. I sent in a T201 Cobb/Crawford to SGC about 3 years ago to be graded and it came back with evidence of being trimmed. I sent the SAME card back in to SGC about a month later and it came back holdered in Ex. condition. So who do I believe? The first grader at SGC who said it was trimmed or the second grader at SGC who graded it Excellent?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I repeat? WHO SAID THE CARD IS ALTERED?!?! SGC???? GAI SAID THE CARD IS GOOD! Send the card to PSA and then ISA for that matter. Majority wins. Right now, the score is tied 1-1....

Bobby, that is what I have been saying all along. Perhaps you just worded it a little better than I did and maybe the sports analogy will help him understand (tied 1-1). It is one TPG's word against another. In a court of law, the burden of proof is on the palintiff and he can't PROVE that the card was trimmed - it is one professional's opinion against another. Hell, SGC didn't even have the card in hand and looked at it only through a slab. I also agree that he should send it in to PSA and see what they have to say if he has any chance of winning.

[Big Ben]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If you really believe the card to be trimmed, shouldn't you go after the grading company and not the seller? Even if the seller was the one that submitted the card (which I don't believe is the case), he paid for a professional opinion and the mistake was made the GAI, not the seller.

Let's say you're buying a house and pay for an professional inspection. The inspection comes back okay, but a month later you find the house is infested with termites. Do you go after the seller of the house for compensation or the inspector who missed the problem?

+1 I was thinking the same thing while reading this thread.

Personally, when I purchase graded cards, I limit myself to PSA, SGC, and Beckett. I stay away from the other companies as I am not comfortable with their grading for this very reason.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by Big Ben

Personally, when I purchase graded cards, I limit myself to PSA, SGC, and Beckett. I stay away from the other companies as I am not comfortable with their grading for this very reason.

I do the same, unless it is a low dollar card where I can't get burned too much. I would never buy a graded card figuring I could get a refund if I took it to another TPG seeking their opinion.

I have been lucky enough to not have to seek a refund on a graded card except once where the description didn't match up with the picture at all and I was able to get my money back. I am thinking this is the only way the OP can get his money back even though the mis-description isn't as extreme.

[novakjr]

The main problem you're going to run into, is that you cannot return the item as purchased. By cracking the slab, whether done by you or SGC, you actually changed what it is. Basically, you cannot give the seller back exactly what he sent you. The slab WAS a major part of the purchase, and that has now since been compromised.

I know the saying is "buy the card, not the holder", BUT anytime you buy a graded/slabbed card(whether the slab is correct or not), that is exactly what you are buying, and NOT just a card.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by novakjr

The main problem you're going to run into, is that you cannot return the item as purchased. By cracking the slab, whether done by you or SGC, you actually changed what it is. Basically, you cannot give the seller back exactly what he sent you. The slab WAS a major part of the purchase, and that has now since been compromised.

I thought we were under the impression that the slab wasn't compromised?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Robextend

I thought we were under the impression that the slab wasn't compromised?

Correct. The OP never said that the slab had been cracked. Somebody assumed that along the way and others who comment aren't reading all the posts.

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Correct. The OP never said that the slab had been cracked. Somebody assumed that along the way and others who comment aren't reading all the posts.

Sorry, yeah. I just caught up on the entire thread. As long as the card is still holdered, there shouldn't be any issues returning it. But it seems no one is 100% sure that this is the case yet though.

Anyways, assuming it's still holdered, this will again come back to the "NO REFUNDS" thing. If you bought the item after seeing that in the listing, then you technically entered into a contract with the seller, knowing that there would be "NO REFUNDS".

[scmavl]

Wow, I'd hate to be in this position, on both sides. If I was the seller and had bought the card in the GAI holder, then later sold it in the same holder, I'd feel like I'd held up my end of the bargain and should not have to refund the money. But on the buyers side, I'd hate to be stuck with an altered card.

I say resubmit to SGC/PSA/Beckett and hope for the best. Good luck.

[tiger8mush]

So if I won a SGC numerically graded card from a Brockelman & Luckey auction and sent the card to PSA (in the SGC holder) and it came back as trimmed, should Leon give me my money back?

[pgellis]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

So if I won a SGC numerically graded card from a Brockelman & Luckey auction and sent the card to PSA (in the SGC holder) and it came back as trimmed, should Leon give me my money back?

+1

[edhans]

As Barry said earlier, sellers need to stand behind their product. Many sellers, including some prominent auction houses, like to hide behind third party graders. This auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was authentic and unaltered. If Todd fulfils that burden of proof that the card is trimmed, he is entitled to a refund. All of the other stuff about GAI and SGC, -4 or -5 and cracked or not cracked is irrelevant.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by edhans

As Barry said earlier, sellers need to stand behind their product. Many sellers, including some prominent auction houses, like to hide behind third party graders. This auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was authentic and unaltered. If Todd fulfils that burden of proof that the card is trimmed, he is entitled to a refund. All of the other stuff about GAI and SGC, -4 or -5 and cracked or not cracked is irrelevant.

I disagree about the cracked and not cracked out part. Who is to say someone can't crack out a card and replace it with a trimmed example? This is getting a bit off topic, but if I buy a card slabbed and crack it out I am doing that knowing that there is no chance I am going to get a refund.

[edhans]

Obviously Todd would have to prove that the card he purchased was altered. Clearly this would be more difficult if the card were cracked out.

[Ease]

(Donning flame-retardant suit...) IMO, advanced collectors know high$ GAI is risky. OP is obviously an advanced collector and knows this, took a chance, and got burned. Have the minerals to take it like a man.

[glchen]

If the card has been cracked out of the slabbed, no return should be allowed. If the card has not been cracked out, the seller should in, good faith, accept the return on the card. Typical ebay sellers typically do not accept returns on graded cards for PSA, SGC, GAI, or Beckett. I don't think this seller is out of bounds here. I purchased a GAI card from Heritage Auctions last year. I tried to cross the card to both PSA and SGC at 1/2 grade lower than the card. The card did not cross. That's life, I took a gamble and have to live with the consequences. Saying that, I really don't think the card has been cracked out of the slab. SGC or PSA would not crack the card out of the slab unless it met the crossover grade. If they crack out the card, that means it met the minimum grade. That's the whole point of crossovers, so that submitters won't get burned if the card does not meeting minimum grade. The TPG would only crack the card if the submitter put Authentic as the crossover grade. Therefore, I think the card is still in the slab, and if Todd discusses with carterscards, they should take the card back. I've purchased cards from carterscards before, and have never had a problem with them. I've asked questions for them, and they've been fairly prompt in coming back with answers. I think they're an honest seller for the most part, as compared to the other ebay sellers out there. In a way, I think they're just a "mass clearinghouse." I saw that they once listed Babe Ruth cards that were obvious reprints. It was something like Reach and Spalding Ruths or something (and not the Spalding Champions). These are the cards that dishonest sellers often list. I sent them a question and asked why'd they'd risk their reputation by listing these kinds of cards when their other stock were fairly high quality. The seller responded to me quickly and what he said was:

"I got these cards in a large deal. To be honest, I know very little about them. I know they are not worth big money but I honestly did not know what to do with them. I guess the best way to answer your question is you kind of get what you get with these things. I know there are collectors so that is the ONLY reason I listed them. Thanks so much for the question and have a great day!!!"

Not really the best answer, but that's how some sellers are.

In regards to the shilling, it definitely does look very suspicious. Shilling is huge problem on ebay and probably even other auctions. I'm not going to say that instance pointed out is not shilling, but some buyers have favorite sellers. They look at those sellers more often, and then bid on them more often which is why they have skewed percentages. Saying that, that case pointed out looks very, very bad.

[mantleman]

I don't believe the seller should have to accept the return. Exit ethics, enter common sense. He did not grade the card, GAI did, so his beef should be with GAI. The buyer:

#1 knew the card was mislabelled

#2 had suspicions of trimming

#3 was weary of "Very early GAI submission"

If he had this many red flags he should have never bought it in the first place.

I am not a powerbuyer, so dropping a grand on a card is a huge deal for me, those would have turned me off right away.

I agree with Eric Schaeffer on this one. Man up!

Andy

[pwilk17]

Buyer knew he was buying a GAI slabbed card - end of story. If buyer paid $1000 for a Pro slabbed card, should he be entitled to a refund if PSA says it is trimmed? If buyer buys an SGC slabbed card and then Pro says it is trimmed, should he get a refund? Not a chance

[richieb315]

If card came back a grade or 2 higher as he thought would he return it to the seller. Let the seller know Gai graded it wrong. I dont think so. Took a chance and it didnt work out. Move on.

[pwilk17]

Carters has 2996 positive feedback (quite an achievement in itself on ebay these days where one guy who pays $2 for a card leaves negative feedback because the post office got it to him in 4 days instead of 3), does absolutely nothing wrong and is now going to get first negative feedback for this - what a shame

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by edhans

As Barry said earlier, sellers need to stand behind their product. Many sellers, including some prominent auction houses, like to hide behind third party graders. This auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was authentic and unaltered. If Todd fulfils that burden of proof that the card is trimmed, he is entitled to a refund. All of the other stuff about GAI and SGC, -4 or -5 and cracked or not cracked is irrelevant.

I think the auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was a GAI 7.5. Which it was.

[mdschulze]

the phrase, "the customer is always right" holds true in 98% of situations like these. Since the card is still in the slab and the buyer hasn't damaged the item, this case should be no exception. As a seller, you want the customer to be happy with their purchase so they will be repeat buyers and/or advertise for you by word of mouth, thus increasing your sales. The seller should just the refund, eat a couple of bucks for shipping, then just relist the card.... everyone wins.

[cozmokramer]

Forget about the seller... maybe GAI should just buy the card back for what it sold for and remove it from circulation in its current holder?

[Chesbro41]

I bought this Pennock from the seller a couple weeks ago. I bought it to help me finish a subset and not the grade (I think it's at best a 50 or 40 SGC). But yeah... hope it's not trimmed. I'll cross it someday and find out.

This is the only GAI card I own because they are such a gamble.

[bcornell]

Originally Posted by pwilk17

Carters has 2996 positive feedback (quite an achievement in itself on ebay these days where one guy who pays $2 for a card leaves negative feedback because the post office got it to him in 4 days instead of 3), does absolutely nothing wrong and is now going to get first negative feedback for this - what a shame

Did you read the posts where it points out that he shill bids his own auctions? I'll withhold my own sympathy for someone who deserves it.


Bill

[vintagecpa]

A seller is responsible for the card they sell.....period. If I sell an altered card that is already slabbed, it is my responsibility to fight the grading company, not the poor sap that bought it from me.

Also, stating you don't accept returns holds about as much legal weight as putting a sign on your front porch stating "Not responsible for accidents". The bottom line is you are responsible regardless of any sign you post.

[edhans]

I think the auction carried an implicit warranty that the card was a GAI 7.5. Which it was.

So sellers now have the right to knowingly sell fake or altered cards that mistakenly end up in TPG holders? I think not. If the seller sold an altered card without adequate disclosure, he is liable for damages. It is irrelevant what any grading service's opinion is. The seller did not disclose that the card wasn't in it's original state. That seems like a material breach of contract to me.

[carrigansghost]

Now Ed, you know that the seller knew this was altered? Let us stick to the facts known. I have a sign onmy door that states,"Never mind the dog, he's cool, the owner will be pissed" and I will back it up 100%.

Rawn

[pgellis]

Who says that the SGC grader is correct here? There is an assumption that SGC did not take it out of the holder (which is still not 100% verified yet), so who's to say that they are correct? Are they right all the time? Especially looking at a card inside a holder?

A lot of people are assuming SGC is always right. I know they have a much better image, but I wonder what PSA would say.

[mdschulze]

The grade, grader, or grading company's liability isn't the issue here at all. If the buyer bought ANY item and decided he didn't want it for ANY reason, he/she should be able to get a full refund, period (unless the buyer damaged the item)! We could be talking about a shirt here instead of a card and it shouldn't change the buyer/seller ethics. JMO

[pgellis]

Originally Posted by mdschulze

The grade, grader, or grading company's liability isn't the issue here at all. If the buyer bought ANY item and decided he didn't want it for ANY reason, he/she should be able to get a full refund, period (unless the buyer damaged the item)! We could be talking about a shirt here instead of a card and it shouldn't change the buyer/seller ethics. JMO

You use the shirt example, so I will use the car example. Can you purchase a vehicle and then drive it home and decide the next day that it isn't for you and then you can just bring it back to the dealer for a full refund? Answer: NO

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by cozmokramer

Forget about the seller... maybe GAI should just buy the card back for what it sold for and remove it from circulation in its current holder?

Does GAI have enough money to do that?

[Peter_Spaeth]

If the condition of the item is unchanged, and a buyer is unhappy and promptly requests a refund, a good seller should accomodate as a matter of good business practice.

As a legal claim, while I am sympathetic to Todd and have been there myself on more than one occasion, I think Todd has a tough time if all he has is a second opinion that the card is trimmed, because the seller did not (in my view) impliedly warrant that other TPGs would share GAI's opinion, and (as far as I know) Todd did not ask for that guaranty. The seller sold the value of GAI's opinion. If he was selling SGC's opinion it might have been worth more. That said, Todd is a good lawyer and I am sure he has good counterarguments to this analysis.