Where are you Jason May...

[savedfrommyspokes]

I sell off a fair number of my duplicates.....about once a month I try to delete the scans that are a year+ or older from my hard drive. Several years ago, my hard drive crashed....all of the images I had stored were unable to be accessed.

So, if after 3 years someone who purchased a (non-graded) card decides to return it, how can a seller verify that the card being returned is the same one sold if no scan is not available due to the "extreme" length of time that has passed?

Is it reasonable to expect a seller to keep every scan of every card they sell in their lifetime just in case a return comes up 2-5 years down the road?

What is a reasonable amount of time that a seller should maintain scans of items sold in order to verify a return?

Is it fair for a seller to take a return back that can't be verified by the scan used to sell it?


Not sure if any of this applies to this situation or not...... either way, 3 years is too long for any reasonable buyer to expect to be able to return an item.


Finally, I also have a HOFer's auto that was signed one day when he was in a hurry and it appears NOTHING like ANY other of his autos I have ever seen....

[irv]

Although I have never sold anything here or on E-Bay before, I believe there is a lesson to be learned here, and that is, every seller, no matter how big or how small, should clearly state in their posts/ads, how long their return policy is.

I was going to say 3 months but like, Ted, mentioned, it took him 3 months for an authentication so I don't think 6 months is unreasonable.

I know many know each other here, but despite that, it should still be clearly stated and adhered too.

[T206Collector]

I know both of the people in this thread and think they're both top notch. They should be able to work it out privately. But, as a collector of signed pre-war cards I would never -- really never -- buy or trade anywhere near full market for a signed T206 that doesn't have full authenticity from SGC, PSA, Beckett, or JSA. When I picked up my latest find, I paid over $1,000 to have JSA and SGC both and separately authenticate them before sending the seller a penny. Wouldn't have done the deal otherwise.

Guys who are comfortable dealing in raw autographs these days are just asking for this kind of trouble. You may know what you have is real, but it really doesn't matter anymore if you ever plan to part with your items.

I can't imagine buying a raw signed T206 card without an explicit -- in writing -- understanding as to authenticity and a timeline for a potential return. And if I were to sell or trade an unauthenticated signed T206, I'd give the buyer a written understanding of my return policy every time.

In this dispute, I have to side with Jason. If I acquired an unauthenticated signed card and hoped to return it if it failed authentication I would have gotten it reviewed in days not weeks, months or years. And if I tried to return it after this period of time, I would be coming as apologetically and politely as I am humanly capable of.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I know both of the people in this thread and think they're both top notch. They should be able to work it out privately. But, as a collector of signed pre-war cards I would never -- really never -- buy or trade anywhere near full market for a signed T206 that doesn't have full authenticity from SGC, PSA, Beckett, or JSA. When I picked up my latest find, I paid over $1,000 to have JSA and SGC both and separately authenticate them before sending the seller a penny. Wouldn't have done the deal otherwise.



Guys who are comfortable dealing in raw autographs these days are just asking for this kind of trouble. You may know what you have is real, but it really doesn't matter anymore if you ever plan to part with your items.



I can't imagine buying a raw signed T206 card without an explicit -- in writing -- understanding as to authenticity and a timeline for a potential return. And if I were to sell or trade an unauthenticated signed T206, I'd give the buyer a written understanding of my return policy every time.



In this dispute, I have to side with Jason. If I acquired an unauthenticated signed card and hoped to return it if it failed authentication I would have gotten it reviewed in days not weeks, months or years. And if I tried to return it after this period of time, I would be coming as apologetically and politely as I am humanly capable of.

Paul,

I appreciate your response and always respect your opinion.

Unfortunately this won't get settled privately as he's shown an unwillingness to respond to my emails and only replying to this thread "because he felt like he needed to."

So, you don't have a problem with his lies? You don't have a problem with him lying about them being wife signed (they are)? You don't have a problem that he lied saying the OWNER OF JSA said these were good (when they aren't)? Why not get them authenticated himself then if they were good? Or, is he just massaging the truth. You don't have a problem with him saying that I can trade or return it if I am uncomfortable with it (as I've shown)? Granted, there was no time frame.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

So, you don't have a problem with his lies? You don't have a problem with him lying about them being wife signed (they are)? You don't have a problem that he lied saying the OWNER OF JSA said these were good (when they aren't)? Why not get them authenticated himself then if they were good? Or, is he just massaging the truth. You don't have a problem with him saying that I can trade or return it if I am uncomfortable with it (as I've shown)? Granted, there was no time frame.

I just think this aspect of the dispute is not really subject to an objective review - these are disputed facts. On the undisputed facts, I can't imagine trying to return cards in the time frame you were working in.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I just think this aspect of the dispute is not really subject to an objective review - these are disputed facts. On the undisputed facts, I can't imagine trying to return cards in the time frame you were working in.

Got it, thanks for the clarification.

[Bruinsfan94]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I know both of the people in this thread and think they're both top notch. They should be able to work it out privately. But, as a collector of signed pre-war cards I would never -- really never -- buy or trade anywhere near full market for a signed T206 that doesn't have full authenticity from SGC, PSA, Beckett, or JSA. When I picked up my latest find, I paid over $1,000 to have JSA and SGC both and separately authenticate them before sending the seller a penny. Wouldn't have done the deal otherwise.

Guys who are comfortable dealing in raw autographs these days are just asking for this kind of trouble. You may know what you have is real, but it really doesn't matter anymore if you ever plan to part with your items.

I can't imagine buying a raw signed T206 card without an explicit -- in writing -- understanding as to authenticity and a timeline for a potential return. And if I were to sell or trade an unauthenticated signed T206, I'd give the buyer a written understanding of my return policy every time.

In this dispute, I have to side with Jason. If I acquired an unauthenticated signed card and hoped to return it if it failed authentication I would have gotten it reviewed in days not weeks, months or years. And if I tried to return it after this period of time, I would be coming as apologetically and politely as I am humanly capable of.

Paul I also respect your opinion, but the problem is he said he would have paid him back, had he been respected better. That is poor ethically right there.

[Jasonxmay]

I realize I'm replying when I said I wouldn't, but I think a few things need to be clarified.

First, Brent fails to mention that the Faber 33 Goudey came with a JSA auction house LOA, which I mailed him at the time of the trade.

Second, Brent messaged me on December 23, 2014 and informed me that someone had told him the Faber W517 was wife signed. Everyone has now seen my response, and I did offer to replace the card or send some cash his way if he wasn't comfortable with the Faber. Brent responded that same day and stated "I love the card and I have no issues with it. I recall we've talked about this card before. I totally trust you and have no problem what so ever. I just love the card, will go nicely with my Rousch." Brent emailed again on December 30, 2014, to tell me he received the cards. He wrote, "Got the cards Saturday, just amazing! So happy with them, thank you!"

I would have gladly reworked the deal at that point if Brent was uncomfortable with the Faber, but he clearly declined that offer. I never offered any type of guarantee that the card would pass authentication, and Brent never requested such a guarantee.

Brent and I have made dozens of deals in the past, and I have to assume the rest of the cards he obtained from me passed authentication since they aren't referenced in this thread.

If Brent had emailed explaining the situation and requesting that we work something out, I would have been much more willing to help resolve the situation. Brent may say his email wasn't demanding, but emailing out of the blue over two years later and stating "how should we go about refunding and returning?" sounds pretty demanding to me.

I hope this clarified my position a bit. I agree that I shouldn't have stated that I would have given him a refund had he been less demanding, as that may not be a true statement. I can say that I would have at least given it more consideration at that point. I suppose one good thing to come from this is that I know never to deal with Brent again. I'm sure he won't voice any objection to that.

Jason

[Republicaninmass]

Interesting little factoid

I bought an expensive card privately and the seller said " i dont know if its real, let me know what psa says"

The card fails psa

Seller didnt specifically offer a guarantee, although he offered it to me as an " autographed card" when it was not.It was now defaced, and worth less than an unsigned card.


My counsel lost in court, since he had said "he didnt know"