|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 06-03-2019 at 07:44 AM. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
We're not question the morality of it, just the legality of it. In other words, at what point does it become an illegal activity? It is illegal to trim a card? Is it illegal to send that card in for grading? If it receives a numeric grade, is it illegal to sell it? At which point, which one of these steps, does it become illegal and how? Last edited by vintagetoppsguy; 06-03-2019 at 07:58 AM. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 06-03-2019 at 08:04 AM. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Legal Definition of Scheme Or Artifice To Defraud www.lectlaw.com/def2/s003.htm SCHEME OR ARTIFICE TO DEFRAUD. A scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services. 18 USC; Any plan or course of action intended to deceive others, and to obtain, by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, money or property from persons so deceived. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I guess what I'm saying is that Moser, Brent or whoever could argue that the customer wasn't deceived, but instead they were done a favor by improving the condition of the card. Last edited by vintagetoppsguy; 06-03-2019 at 08:09 AM. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() re: this: "could argue that the customer wasn't deceived, but instead they were done a favor by improving the condition of the card." "deception" and "favor" are not mutually exclusive, nor does the law say they have to be to show fraud i would imagine. in other words, if an act is fraudulent whether it is determined to be beneficial does not make it something other than fraud...that would be my layman's assumption at least. Last edited by griffon512; 06-03-2019 at 08:41 AM. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's sad to see so many essentially sticking up for the trimmers. A couple articles
First, when it becomes acceptable to use a nonsense story about "I didn't know" and what happens after. https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/20...-it-heres-how/ And the "is it really a crime" thing...… https://www.autoblog.com/2019/02/07/...ed-each-night/ |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
He got you there, Pete!
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
I didn't draft the statutes, David, they are what they are. There are jurisdictional limitations on the reach of federal law. Other laws might apply to your situation.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 06-03-2019 at 08:07 AM. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
What Peter is trying to say is that federal mail and wire fraud statutes don’t cover the entirety of all criminal fraud statutes.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
thanks for helping these few gentlemen that are very confused about stealing $$$ from people being criminal.
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Laws like that are actually common. The legislators figure the people that can sell through the mail have 1000s of more potential customers that someone that has to have someone show up at a show. So they are trying to catch the bigger players. Not saying there are loopholes are that it isnt silly but thats the justification of that conflict...
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
How many times do you have to spell it out? It's like 3rd grade here.
|
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
I know. This is truly not a very difficult concept to grasp.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Failing to disclose a material fact is fraud by non-disclosure, also known as fraudulent concealment. You don't have to affirmatively lie by saying something that isn't the truth. Failing to speak may also be fraud. I think that may be part of the disconnect.
If you trim a card, get it by the graders (which seems to be much easier that I had previously thought it might be) and either consign it to be sold or sell it directly yourself as worth whatever numerical grade it was given, that is fraud. The numerical grade is a material fact upon which the buyer based their decision to pay $XXX.00 for it upon. If you trimmed it (or knew it was trimmed) you have committed fraud by non-disclosure because you knew it didn't deserve a numerical grade. You have a duty to disclose that, plain and simple. Every time. If you use the mails or wires as part of your selling scheme, you get to look at mail or wire fraud. Last edited by Kenny Cole; 06-03-2019 at 08:10 AM. |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Brent/PWCC interview on recent controversies | Stonepony | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 204 | 05-27-2019 06:33 PM |
| PWCC Recent Closings | Exhibitman | Boxing / Wrestling Cards & Memorabilia Forum | 8 | 03-29-2018 05:05 PM |
| Recent PWCC Auction | Snapolit1 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 09-08-2016 01:50 PM |
| Thoughts on this card? (trimming, stain, etc) | scmavl | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 4 | 04-01-2011 12:32 PM |
| Interesting Story Concerning Card Trimming and Grading | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 04-10-2002 06:43 PM |