PSA reholder issues - warning to submitters

[parkplace33]

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Hasn't happened to me, but I've heard from members about similar issues. This conflicts directly with what is stated on their website:

"What is a Reholder service?

The “Reholder” service applies to trading cards that are currently graded and encapsulated by PSA that the customer would like placed into the most current PSA holder.

For this submission type, the cards will not be graded. The cards will be received and then inspected by a member of the grading team to determine if the card and PSA holder are authentic.

Once it is determined that the holder and card are genuine, the card will be removed and placed into a new PSA holder. This service is generally used for cards that are housed in PSA holders that have been damaged, or to create label consistency within a collection."

Source: https://www.psacard.com/services/tra...ading/reholder

[jiw98]

I have a friend that's been waiting for 8 months for a reholder of a card that PSA made a mistake on the label. Seems like a long time to correct a mistake that they made.

[ullmandds]

What a racket

[Snowman]

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

+1. Let’s see some evidence.

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

I’m not sure why you wouldn’t believe these stories. PSA is an absolute dumpster fire for consistency in grading and QC.

I’ve had this experience and I have the PSA customer service emails to prove it. I sent an Old Mill T206 Cy Young PSA 1.5 with a ding in the case to PSA for reholdering. This was the response I received (I ended up having them send it back unprocessed because they are incompetent):

The damage is the top right front, slight star ding.

“It has come to our attention your PSA encased card, cert #26118754 - 1909-11 T206 Old Mill Cy Young Clev., Glove Shows was received with a crack on the holder.
Upon re-holdering the card, we will review the card to confirm it meets the current grade 1.5 and it has not been damaged.”

Good riddance PSA, SGC is leagues better anyway.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

My thoughts exactly.

[Jenx34]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

I agree at least in the sense that more information would be required. I have talked to people who have gotten money back from PSA's guarantee, though those circumstances may be different. But without full details, it's too vague to really make much of a judgement.

[Neal]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I wouldn't believe these stories at face value without evidence or more information.

Agreed

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[refz]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

What a racket

I know right…

[Fred]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

What a racket

The collecting public is the biggest enabler.

If you're not on the inside, you're on the outside looking in. With all the crappy service and subjectivity (accepting trimmed cards and looking the other way), the collecting public keeps begging for more and continues to pay for it.

Think about this - if a company doesn't honor their original subjective opinion and stiffs the public without any compensation by re-holdering with lower grade, then they're going to continue to do it because the collecting public (as a whole) allows/enables them to do so.

Until the collecting public gets their collective shittt together and boycotts, they're going to continue to get their asses handed to them.

I can almost recall "when it was a hobby". It hasn't for a long time now.

Every thread should have a picture of a card:

PSA8 Wagner T206.jpg

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by jiw98

I have a friend that's been waiting for 8 months for a reholder of a card that PSA made a mistake on the label. Seems like a long time to correct a mistake that they made.

Just wait till you get it back and it is still wrong after they fricken charged for the reholder. That is my recent experience.

For those asking for proof I posted about it on here along with pictures already.

[3-2-count]

I’m surprised to hear that some would actually doubt this could happen.

You realize it’s PSA we’re discussing here, don’t you?

[ClementeFanOh]

You are spot on, Tony. The original poster is under zero obligation to
provide "evidence- pretty sure we aren't in court. Some people need
proof that water is wet, I suppose- Trent King

[G1911]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

I’m surprised to hear that some would actually doubt this could happen.

You realize it’s PSA we’re discussing here, don’t you?

Are people doubting it could happen, or asking for evidence it did? PSA might be violating their own promises on what the reholdering process is. I'm an anti-grading PSA hater who thinks them frequently incompetent and sometimes corrupt. I still expect to see evidence for a claim, because that is how reason works. Believing everything I hear that suits my interests or could happen would be absurd and silly.

No information at all has been presented, just a claim without any supporting evidence or verifiable facts. Applying an evidentiary standard is not the same as saying X could never happen.

[esehombre]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

I’m surprised to hear that some would actually doubt this could happen.

You realize it’s PSA we’re discussing here, don’t you?

Anyway, that it isnt important - anyone want to buy a rare Diego Maradona rookie?

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

I’m surprised to hear that some would actually doubt this could happen.

You realize it’s PSA we’re discussing here, don’t you?

Yea - Never underestimate the ability of PSA to disenfranchise it's customer base.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

They should contact an attorney, have the actual contracts/agreements they were asked to sign reviewed in detail to make sure they didn't accidently sign something different, or determine if they were possibly subject to a type/form of a bait and switch tactic where they relied upon what was on a TPG's website or other documentation, before being given something different to sign and which was not what they thought they were agreeing to. If it still looks like the TPG could be at fault, begin reaching out and look to contact as many other people who may have faced and had the same thing done to them, and then start a class-action lawsuit with as many potential plaintiffs as possible.

An individual going back and by themselves questioning a large organization for something like this is likely to just be ignored, and/or summarily dismissed, by the party that wronged them. Approaching that same party with legal representation and a large group of class-action participants is likely going to get a much different reaction and response from the alleged wrongdoer.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

They should contact an attorney, have the actual contracts/agreements they were asked to sign reviewed in detail to make sure they didn't accidently sign something different, or determine if they were possibly subject to a type/form of a bait and switch tactic where they relied upon what was on a TPG's website or other documentation, before being given something different to sign and which was not what they thought they were agreeing to. If it still looks like the TPG could be at fault, begin reaching out and look to contact as many other people who may have faced and had the same thing done to them, and then start a class-action lawsuit with as many potential plaintiffs as possible.

An individual going back and by themselves questioning a large organization for something like this is likely to just be ignored, and/or summarily dismissed, by the party that wronged them. Approaching that same party with legal representation and a large group of class-action participants is likely going to get a much different reaction and response from the alleged wrongdoer.

One plaintiff is enough to start a putative class action, having many doesn't really make any difference. If you are talking about many plaintiffs consolidating their claims into a regular (not class) action, that's something different.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

One plaintiff is enough to start a putative class action, having many doesn't really make any difference. If you are talking about many plaintiffs consolidating their claims into a regular (not class) action, that's something different.

LOL

I am not attorney as you know, but since the OP mentioned knowing 3 people with somewhat similar situations, I think we both know there are likely a whole heck of a lot more people than just those 3 that may be a tad unhappy with how they were treated and dismissed by such an entity. And I think we both have seen, or at least heard of, situations where an individual going up against a large company/entity usually gets dismissed when they complain. That company/entity knows full well that an individual probably doesn't have the time or resources to really follow through and go after them, as their actual loss (downgrading their card from a 3.0 to say a 2.0 grade, without the card owner's knowledge and approval, and the subsequent loss in card value that incurs) isn't likely to be worth the time and effort for that individual to fight the larger company/entity at fault. That same person partnering up with others in a consolidation of claims, or a class action type suit, can change that dynamic though.

Our society today will often also quickly side against such an individual that, by themself, can be shown to maybe have missed understanding or doing something that a company/entity can maybe then try to legally hide behind because they got the harmed party to sign or agree to something they didn't fully realize or understand. But start bringing forward a whole group of people (via either a class-action or simple consolidation of claims type of action) that got taken by that same company/entity in similar ways and manners, and suddenly the public starts to say to themselves, "Wait a minute, WTF is going on!". Also, with more people banding together, you're way more likely to be able to find legal representation that is more than willing to take on such a legal action, for not just publicity, but for a more likely than not payday to come. But you're the attorney, please tell me if I'm completely wrong in that thinking. I simply mentioned a class-action suit as I figured most non-attorneys on the forum would understand my meaning and intent that way. Thanks for informing everyone and adding the option to simply consolidate plaintiff claims as another possible action.

But back to the point of why it might be good to consolidate potential plaintiffs in such actions, think of it another way. Say one woman comes forward and accuses someone, maybe a TV star, a movie producer, or even an NFL quarterback, of sexual abuse and other crimes and issues. Often it becomes a "he said - she said" situation, with a lot of people often going against the alleged victim as just being out for money or some other self-serving reason. But now replace that one alleged female victim with literally dozens or more woman coming forward with similar stories of harm, all at the same time, and against the same alleged offender. Suddenly the public, and the courts, start to pay a little more attention and realize that there might be a lot more to this than just a simple one-time, "he said - she said" kind of thing, where there really was no harm being caused by the accused party's continuing, and maybe not so unintentional, actions.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If an individual has a claim that is likely to meet the technical requirements for class action treatment, and the potential class damages are large enough, the individual won't need any resources at all to fight the big company, that's what the class action bar does. Of course most claims won't fit that category despite the public perception of class actions as some panacea for every wrong done by TPGs and everyone else in corporate America. That said, under the right circumstances, they are a powerful tool.

[JimmyC]

I’ve posted before - Case I - bought an Ernie Banks game used bat from a major auction house - when the bat arrived it had a full PSA Authentication Letter for the autograph - problem is that Bat was never autographed…..NEVER…..

Case II - Sent pics of a Munson signed baseball signed in front of me and a buddy as children for a quick opinion (buddy wanted to sell) and PSA rejected the autograph….stellar work gang….

PSA is a joke - plain and simple….go to any site selling PSA cards - 7s look like 8s - look like 6s……

No consistency……a total joke…..

Do I have PSA authenticated and graded items in my collection? Yes - will I ever send anything into them for authentication or grading - NO…..I’ve had a friend submit a few tickets for me just to get them slabbed for protection purposes - would never send them a baseball card to get graded….and certainly wouldn’t trust them to reslab one of their own…..

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

How is each story unique? It seems you are omitting details here that could be relevant.

[Flintboy]

I wonder if they ever increased the grade? Seriously doubt that…

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Flintboy

I wonder if they ever increased the grade? Seriously doubt that…

I doubt it too, but at the same time if these are older slabs, the cards are more probably overgraded relative to today's standards.

[Tabe]

Does PSA disclaim liability if card is damaged during a reholder? Are they actually regrading the card or just validating there was no damage and then lowering the grade if there was?

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I doubt it too, but at the same time if these are older slabs, the cards are more probably overgraded relative to today's standards.

Agree with Peter. It seems the grading standards are more strict today. I submitted a 1952 Topps Campos red star/black star for re-holdering and had no issues. Same grade.

[Yoda]

I'm confused: If I am reading this correctly, upon receiving a card for re-holder, not review, PSA will still review the grade if there is a flaw in the slab and often will lower the current grade if they feel it is warranted. So, for example, if a consignor submitted a 1933 Goudey #53 Ruth for a re-holder because the case was slightly cracked, not affecting the card in any way, and the grader decides it is really a 4.5. Low and behold yes, the submitter has a nice new case with a revised current flip but with a lower grade, resulting in a market value drop of $thousands. Such a scenario would be a nightmare.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

Agree with Peter. It seems the grading standards are more strict today. I submitted a 1952 Topps Campos red star/black star for re-holdering and had no issues. Same grade.

Hi Mike, was this sent in for review, reholder, or CrC? (Label correction)

This might be the issue.

Since shipping sucks, I sent in a card for "review" that was mislabeled. I figure let me get a bump and a new holder. Currently says crc assembly, so I believe they would not review it in the mislabeled slab. Hopefully they wont charge me! It will be tied for highest graded copy as is, a .5 will be highest, any lower and I'm looking for boku bucks

[trambo]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How is each story unique? It seems you are omitting details here that could be relevant.

+1

Not saying I don't believe it but also need a little more to go on. I've had maybe 15-20 cards reholdered w/no issue. In the instances where I've seen grades changed, there was damage to the slab.

[asoriano]

Originally Posted by trambo

In the instances where I've seen grades changed, there was damage to the slab.

this ^^^

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

I will be one of the last people to defend PSA but I would need more info on the 3 examples before I commented. Having said that, it always worried me if PSA voluntarily received a review or reholder order and they notice the card is altered, if they wanted to pass the buck onto the owner, they could just claim the holder was compromised and take the card off the market without having to buy it back.

Anyway, something is not adding up...to me. Maybe it is the lack of detail and vagueness of your post but also could be the way you worded something in the post: "They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered."

Anyone who does reholders knows that service does not include reviews of the grade or card unless PSA claims the holder was compromised so the the better way to have written that statement would have been, "The cards were sent in for reholder service but while there they reviewed the cards too." Might be semantics but what I wrote conveys a different sentiment than what you wrote.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

In the last 3 months, three different vintage collectors (including one I know personally) have had issues reholdering their cards with PSA. Each story is a bit unique but here is the gist:

Collector has a higher dollar vintage PSA card they want reholdered. They do not want it reviewed, only reholdered. The original slabs are not damaged nor tampered with.

Collector sends the card to PSA. Collector gets the card back in a new holder but it is now a lower PSA grade. Collector is not offered monetary value for the lower grade. Of course, all three collectors are not happy.

Has any net54 members had similar experiences? With these recent issues, I would be leery of sending a card back for reholder.

Bumping this post… anyone have any recent reholder issues? Or were these three examples one offs?

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Bumping this post… anyone have any recent reholder issues? Or were these three examples one offs?

Bumping this up again. Last week, I saw two examples on social media about reholders coming back in lower grades.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Bumping this up again. Last week, I saw two examples on social media about reholders coming back in lower grades.

Could you share links to those posts?