PSA Response from President Steve Sloan

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Someone owns a baseball card. That's legal. They do something to it to enhance its appearance. That's legal. The consistent theme of your responses seems to be, if what was done to improve its appearance is disclosed, no problem.

But if nothing of that nature is committed to paper, couldn't it come down to:

Card Doctor : I told them I was improving the cards appearance some.
Auctioneer: I don't remember him saying that (or) I didn't know altering is what he meant.

Basically, He Said, He Said. Then when the card is sold to a third person, because of the claimed confusion above, no mention of "enhancements" is communicated to the current owner of the card, and now its circulating out there.

Thanks again for your thoughtfulness in this conversation. It's so nice to catch a break from the snarkiness, once in awhile.

And again I am not suggesting nothing wrong was done, and I appreciate the fact you get that.

I'm glad if our discussion helped clarify things in your mind. I can understand how some of it might not be readily obvious if in your mind what you did was done in good faith not to cheat someone but instead to improve the appearance of the card.

And you are correct that if you own a baseball card, it is yours and you can do with it anything you want. But if you submit it for grading or sell it privately, if what you did would reasonably be material information to the grading company or your purchaser and is not readily obvious, you disclose. There's no downside to doing it and it could save you from some unpleasant accusations down the road.

As to the hypothetical you describe of making the disclosure orally, not a great idea. Put it writing, and if the other party will not acknowledge receipt of your disclosure, confirm it in an email (preferable) or text. A person's mood has a tendency to shift when he/she is about to loose big bucks and is looking for someone to pin it on.