What happens when JSA changes their mind???

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by botn

Probably best to read all the posts but the auction house is still in business but they are not the ones who should make the buyer whole. The representation that the sig was good came from JSA. When an authenticator decides something they previously assessed as being ok is no longer ok they should buy it back. In the card world that happens when errors are admitted to.

My guess is that REA submitted the item without letting JSA know it was previously authenticated which shows just how little consistency there is in the authentication process with sigs.

Really?! Can you give an example of PSA or any other authenticator buying a card back for its purchase price? I am not a card guy and the only example I can think of is the trimmed Wagner, but no mistake has been admitted there.

Authenticators are not guarantors nor insurers. They give opinions. I think JSA should refund the original authentication fee, but they should never be on the hook for a purchase price of any item, otherwise we could cook up some new scams at their expense.

I still think the original auction house should be called on to make a judgment. "Please resell this item I purchased through your house previously. If JSA is who you trust to authenticate, then ask them why they changed their minds and then tell me whether you think you profited from an inauthentic item."

[botn]

Really?! Can you give an example of PSA or any other authenticator buying a card back for its purchase price? I am not a card guy and the only example I can think of is the trimmed Wagner, but no mistake has been admitted there.

Both SGC and PSA have bought back cards which were determined later to be altered but having received a grade. The number of cards they have bought back is a very very tiny percentage of what should be bought back. Usually once it is holdered they stand behind their assessment so the guarantee is really just to make the brand appear more legit and give peace of mind to those buying into their opinions.

Authenticators are not guarantors nor insurers. They give opinions.

Apparently so...this is from JSA's site under polices which begs the question as to why anyone would put any credibility into the opinion if they are not willing to stand behind it?

Certification and authentication involves an individual judgment that is subjective and requires the exercise of professional opinion, which can change from time to time. Therefore, JSA makes no warranty or representation and shall have no liability whatsoever to the customer for the opinion rendered by JSA on any submission.

Amazing that someone can rely on a professional's opinion, be harmed by relying on that opinion, and the professional is not held accountable. In many other fields this would be malpractice.

[bn2cardz]

I would contact the original auction house.

They state in their rules:

...we take great pride in only offering "IRONCLAD", "LEAD PIPE", "NO QUESTIONS ASKED" autographs.

Since they make such a statement I would think they would stand behind anything that comes back with a new opinion from the same group in the future.

[Duluth Eskimo]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Really?! Can you give an example of PSA or any other authenticator buying a card back for its purchase price? I am not a card guy and the only example I can think of is the trimmed Wagner, but no mistake has been admitted there.

Authenticators are not guarantors nor insurers. They give opinions. I think JSA should refund the original authentication fee, but they should never be on the hook for a purchase price of any item, otherwise we could cook up some new scams at their expense.

I still think the original auction house should be called on to make a judgment. "Please resell this item I purchased through your house previously. If JSA is who you trust to authenticate, then ask them why they changed their minds and then tell me whether you think you profited from an inauthentic item."

I agree that the original auction house is the person to talk to, but PSA has backed up their initial opinion at least a few times for me when they discovered the had made a mistake with an auction letter. Most of the time they would give me credit on my new order for the amount I was out. I have not heard of JSA doing this though.

[jad22]

"Best Wishes" does not appear to be written. Many of the other Robinson examples have that. Both black and white and the gold.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

I agree that the original auction house is the person to talk to, but PSA has backed up their initial opinion at least a few times for me when they discovered the had made a mistake with an auction letter. Most of the time they would give me credit on my new order for the amount I was out. I have not heard of JSA doing this though.

Wow, that is pretty standup of them, but I want to ask: When you say "the amount I was out," are you talking about the purchase price of an item, or of services previously rendered by PSA? And are you talking about cards (PSA) or autographs (PSA/DNA)? I'm not aware of any "auction letters" for cards, but I'm not really a card guy. Thanks.

[Duluth Eskimo]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Wow, that is pretty standup of them, but I want to ask: When you say "the amount I was out," are you talking about the purchase price of an item, or of services previously rendered by PSA? And are you talking about cards (PSA) or autographs (PSA/DNA)? I'm not aware of any "auction letters" for cards, but I'm not really a card guy. Thanks.

No, I am talking about the hammer price plus the juice. The last one was a Hollywood group of about 5 items of one specific actor. I also deal in golf related signatures and this was a cross collectible to the golf guys otherwise I should have known better. I submitted for COA's as my buyer only buys items with PSA or JSA and PSA said they made a mistake on these items. Credited me the full total which was fine as my order was more than that anyhow. Not sure if they would have paid money, but I thought that was very fair of them. Not something that comes out of my mouth about PSA very often.