PSA Response from President Steve Sloan

[70ToppsFanatic]

Originally Posted by brad31

I wonder if PSA has asked to contact the seller because PWCC has already agreed to refund purchases in exchange for not being banned from future submissions and not falling out of PSA’s good graces (i.e PSA promoting their record sales price on card X).

More like in hopes that PSA will not seek to go after them criminally.

PSA is now the puppet master and Brent is the puppet.

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by 70ToppsFanatic

More like in hopes that PSA will not seek to go after them criminally.

PSA is now the puppet master and Brent is the puppet.

PSA should honor their guarantee and then go after Brent, Moser or whomever to make them whole. Why then are they attempting to put the onus on the card owner to go back to whom they purchased it from for refunds? Shouldn’t they be handling that themselves?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

PSA should honor their guarantee and then go after Brent, Moser or whomever to make them whole. Why then are they attempting to put the onus on the card owner to go back to whom they purchased it from for refunds? Shouldn’t they be handling that themselves?

Of course they should! Otherwise, why even claim they provide a guarantee?

In the other ongoing thread, we saw how it turned out when an affected buyer politely asked PWCC for a refund. He was put off and rebuffed. Everyone is now passing the buck, and it's the collector who is screwed.

Do not keep supporting PWCC and PSA and feeding them money. They do not act in the hobby's best interest (just their own). If you really feel a 3rd Party opinion is necessary, use someone else!

[CuriousGeorge]

PSA is part of a public company and has a board and shareholders to report to and protect. I suspect the best interests of the hobby would come somewhat further down their list.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

PSA should honor their guarantee and then go after Brent, Moser or whomever to make them whole. Why then are they attempting to put the onus on the card owner to go back to whom they purchased it from for refunds? Shouldn’t they be handling that themselves?

This.

[steve B]

I really do think this statement is horrible.

If you believe someone altered a card, PSA thinks the best thing to do is return the card that they couldn't the alterations on to the same person.

Those will of course just be cracked and resubmitted for a clean number in a new slab, and in time the whole thing will be forgotten.
Or the same people who can't get it right in the first place will re-evaluate???