The Authenticator Strikes Again

[Peter_Spaeth]

This time, for the second time in my experience, they have rejected an SGC card claiming the slab was scratched. I am a fanatic about slabs and like any of my prior generation SGC slabs that I did not send off to be reholdered, this one was very nice, easily top 10 percent condition wise. So stupidly wasteful. If I didn't know better I would think PSA was biased even with their evaluator hat on.

[JimC]

You know better???

[Leon]

So they reject for a scratched slab, LOL?
.

[Snowman]

It's pretty easy to polish out scratches on plastic slabs. Seems rather silly

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's pretty easy to polish out scratches on plastic slabs. Seems rather silly

Especially SGC, they scratch if you breathe on them. This was absurd.

[G1911]

I hope this program dies or they let me sign a waiver opting out of it or similar, but I have not had anything rejected for being scratched. I've got some less than nice SGC slabs (which I cut open and destroy upon receipt). If what everyone I've talked to says is true, then PSA is really inconsistent about what they are doing with this program, which doesn't surprise. PSA authenticating SGC slabs is wild.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by G1911

I hope this program dies or they let me sign a waiver opting out of it or similar, but I have not had anything rejected for being scratched. I've got some less than nice SGC slabs (which I cut open and destroy upon receipt). If what everyone I've talked to says is true, then PSA is really inconsistent about what they are doing with this program, which doesn't surprise. PSA authenticating SGC slabs is wild.

The program has its good points. I recently was nearly robbed of 35K by an eBay seller with over 10K feedback who tried to sell me a card he didn’t possess. After I paid, I realized the next day that the scans were lifted from a Memory Lane auction. When the seller realized he was required to send the card to the authenticator first, he instead wrote to me that he was “ nervous” about sending the card to anyone but me and instead refunded my money. I wrote to him and explained that in future scams he needed to keep the purchase price below the $250 level which triggers the program. He never responded. I sent all this info to eBay including the Memory Lane auction scans and eBay acknowledged the fraud — but only put the seller on probation.

[raulus]

The concept of the authentication process seems sound. Obviously this outcome is a complete bastardization of that concept.

Peter - Just out of curiosity, what kind of volume do you have on eBay that is subject to the AG? Do you sell 1 piece per year, so they're basically hitting you every time? Or are you selling 1,000 items per day, so they only bounce you out 0.01% of the time?

Just trying to get a better handle on the stupidity rate.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by calvindog

The program has its good points. I recently was nearly robbed of 35K by an eBay seller with over 10K feedback who tried to sell me a card he didn’t possess. After I paid, I realized the next day that the scans were lifted from a Memory Lane auction. When the seller realized he was required to send the card to the authenticator first, he instead wrote to me that he was “ nervous” about sending the card to anyone but me and instead refunded my money. I wrote to him and explained that in future scams he needed to keep the purchase price below the $250 level which triggers the program. He never responded. I sent all this info to eBay including the Memory Lane auction scans and eBay acknowledged the fraud — but only put the seller on probation.

As with any widespread program used many thousands of times, I am sure there are numerous individual occasions it will prove useful. I have no doubt it will save people who have done no research into what a real card looks like especially. This particular scenario though is covered under the prior eBay policy anyways; I have always been refunded at the 30 day mark by eBay when the seller has not actually had the item (or refused to ship) under that policy.

I am not a fan of PSA being able to unilaterally veto a deal following the rules of the hosting platform, and myself and the seller have both consented to and are doing of our own volition for almost any reason PSA or CSG decides. I collect a lot of obscure cards that aren't baseball; so a high percentage of things I buy are technically described or listed on. So far the saving grace for me is that PSA/CSG doesn't understand them either to know it was described wrong. A scratch on the holder, small damage on a rare card I don't care about and saw in the picture, there are way too many ways for PSA/CSG to kill a deal I as the buyer have consented to do and want the card anyways. Some people have reported PSA has reached out to them about an issue before killing their deal; other deals they just kill unilaterally and ignore what the two people want. It's moved a lot of my insignificant plebe money off of eBay because the platform is becoming increasingly unreliable and I'm tired of the 'will I get my card or not' game.

If eBay actually banned scammers and cracked down instead of arranging junk programs like this to dance around the actual root problem, it would be a much better platform.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by calvindog

The program has its good points. I recently was nearly robbed of 35K by an eBay seller with over 10K feedback who tried to sell me a card he didn’t possess. After I paid, I realized the next day that the scans were lifted from a Memory Lane auction. When the seller realized he was required to send the card to the authenticator first, he instead wrote to me that he was “ nervous” about sending the card to anyone but me and instead refunded my money. I wrote to him and explained that in future scams he needed to keep the purchase price below the $250 level which triggers the program. He never responded. I sent all this info to eBay including the Memory Lane auction scans and eBay acknowledged the fraud — but only put the seller on probation.

A slap on the wrist suspension for a potential $35K fraud attempt? Sorry but WTF? I don't get it. Is it because the seller had 10K+ feedbacks? That's just jacked up.

[obcmac]

Originally Posted by calvindog

The program has its good points. I recently was nearly robbed of 35K by an eBay seller with over 10K feedback who tried to sell me a card he didn’t possess. After I paid, I realized the next day that the scans were lifted from a Memory Lane auction. When the seller realized he was required to send the card to the authenticator first, he instead wrote to me that he was “ nervous” about sending the card to anyone but me and instead refunded my money. I wrote to him and explained that in future scams he needed to keep the purchase price below the $250 level which triggers the program. He never responded. I sent all this info to eBay including the Memory Lane auction scans and eBay acknowledged the fraud — but only put the seller on probation.

Are you against outing the seller and card? I would think a 35K attempted theft/fraud would be of interest to someone in law enforcement (maybe I'm foolish for thinking so).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

So they reject for a barely scratched slab, LOL?
.

Fixed it for you.

[RhodeyRhode]

Originally Posted by Leon

So they reject for a scratched slab, LOL?
.

Has happened to me also on a card. Stating it needed to say scratch in the description. I was like its a high res image and everything is clearly visible. It looks to me ebay has a quota they have to reject so many and are making things up. And yes SGC slab. Never had had it happen to a psa slab

[Jay Wolt]

Here's an easy solution, go to the Post Office & rent a P.O. Box
& have your ebay purchases sent there & the authenticating service
is void & you get your card w/o delay.

[Popcorn]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Here's an easy solution, go to the Post Office & rent a P.O. Box
& have your ebay purchases sent there & the authenticating service
is void & you get your card w/o delay.

Not for long. They are working on adding P.O. Boxes to the AG program.

I just had a 14’ cj returned that was probably vg-ex because the seller stated that it was near mint. I asked them to sell it to me through PayPal and they agreed. Also sent eBay a message asking them in the future to please contact me before return any purchases.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Here's an easy solution, go to the Post Office & rent a P.O. Box
& have your ebay purchases sent there & the authenticating service
is void & you get your card w/o delay.

What's the logic there?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Here's an easy solution, go to the Post Office & rent a P.O. Box
& have your ebay purchases sent there & the authenticating service
is void & you get your card w/o delay.

Looks like an 11x11 P.O. box will cost me $516 for 12 months using the USPS website.

Doesn't having to pay $500 to the government to have a temporary workaround to drive to because a 3rd party company is killing a deal that follows the rules of the platform it was agreed to upon and for which the buyer and seller are both actively consenting and choosing to do of their own free will seem absolutely ridiculous? Or does this make sense to some people?

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This time, for the second time in my experience, they have rejected an SGC card claiming the slab was scratched. I am a fanatic about slabs and like any of my prior generation SGC slabs that I did not send off to be reholdered, this one was very nice, easily top 10 percent condition wise. So stupidly wasteful. If I didn't know better I would think PSA was biased even with their evaluator hat on.

Peter,

Can we see the card (scan or the listing)?