![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
This part is bothersome.
Last line.... and the Guarantee does not apply to, and cannot be utilized by, the original submitter (or the original submitter’s agents, employees, affiliates or representatives) of the graded card. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
That was my first reaction when I saw it. However, I can see a valid purpose -- to prevent a card doctor from benefiting from his doctoring. Such a person improves, say, a 3 to an 8, and then tries to profit from his doctoring by invoking the Guarantee.
Last edited by benjulmag; 06-18-2019 at 03:32 PM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
That’s exactly what PSA is counting on to limit their liability in this mess. By directing people to return their cards to the seller their hope is that the cards will be returned to the card doctor, thus allowing them to avoid liability altogether. I just called PSA about 4 cards that I have that I believe were altered and they really tried to get me to send them to the seller. I did not buy these cards from PWCC so I’m sending them straight to PSA. We’ll see how good their guarantee really is. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I'll definitely post the outcome. I'm sending then in this week. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You used a blacklight? To detect alterations? What a novel concept. It's a wonder the TPGers, particularly PSA and Beckett thus far, haven't figured that out. What do we pay them to do?
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Are you going to tip them off to the alteration, or see if they even bother to check at all? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
So, to get back to the exception in the Guarantee that prohibits the original submitter from invoking it, that exception should not have an impact upon a person who in good faith purchases a graded doctored card. It will be interesting to see what PSA does when it receives the 4 cards you are returning to them. I am not questioning that they are altered, but what is your proof? The part of the Guarantee that could cause you the most trouble is the exception that prevents you from taking them out of the slab to better examine them. That exception obviously has a valid purpose behind its insertion, but also serves a nefarious purpose -- to prevent detailed forensic examination of the card. So you could be in a Catch 22 -- unless you have before and after pics of the card, in order to prove it is doctored you might have to take it out of the slab, but if you do so, you are prevented from invoking the Guarantee. If the day should come when technology comes to the rescue and a new TPG forms using as it business model advanced forensic analysis to detect doctoring, at that point I can foresee a day of reckoning for PSA. PSA will of course rely on the "taking-out-of-the-slab prohibition" exception in the Guarantee to insure a doctored card is not examined by such advanced methods. People will scream how else can they prove the card is doctored to successfully invoke the Guarantee. It would seem inevitable at that point that a person will take the card out of the slab under circumstances (e.g., video recording) that will establish the removal was done for the sole purpose of doing a forensic examination that otherwise could not be done, and that no fraud is being perpetrated on PSA. A court, if looking to interpret the Guarantee exception as narrowly as possible, will try to find a way to rule for the victimized card owner, perhaps by ignoring the literal wording of the Guarantee and looking at the intent behind the exception. The Guarantee also provides all cases adjudicated under it must be brought in Orange County, which is John Wayne territory. I wonder if the state court in that jurisdiction would take as sympathetic a view toward such a plaintiff than would a court in a different jurisdiction. In contrast, the federal court in that circuit is regarded as a very liberal court. The Guarantee does not require that cases brought under it be brought in state court only, so whether to file in state or federal court will be an important decision the plaintiff's lawyer will need to make. Last edited by benjulmag; 06-19-2019 at 02:50 AM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Unless the card is sufficiently valuable to meet the federal amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction (assuming a non- California plaintiff), now $75,000, what's the basis for a federal claim?
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 06-19-2019 at 05:30 AM. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What happens when PWCC runs out of money to return buyers of affective cards who request returns/refunds ? Where is their money coming from ? Is something being worked out behind the scenes with them and psa to cya ? Is psa funding them to keep up with their buy backs of bad stuff ??
Idk food for thought ?? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Monday I received an 8k refund from PWCC for 7 cards I returned. 3 were clearly altered (only because I found before photos) and the other 4 were on a list out there but I couldn’t find the evidence myself.
Cory Weiser |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"over 17,000 cards, lots, and sets up for bid in our 6th Auction of 2019."
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You would have to meet that threshold, which given what a lot of high grade cards go for coupled with the number of doctored cards a lot of people will have, should pose no problem for many potential plantiffs. I agree though that a number of potential submitters will have to file in state court. Assuming PSA wants to stay out of federal court, I'm surprised they didn't require all cases be brought in state court.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Or maybe you will have to wait 3 months or more to get a response because 'what choice do you have' |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
That's about as dodgy as it gets. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Why take on all that additional liability when the guarantee stiffs fraudulent submitters and card doctors? If the sale never happened, the grade guarantee doesn't need to be paid out.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A non-PWCC thread. | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 22 | 06-05-2019 09:36 PM |
Dispute with an auction company | Stanesq | Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports | 19 | 04-06-2016 08:17 AM |
ebay dispute question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 04-17-2008 09:33 PM |
Ebay dispute resolution | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 05-01-2005 10:04 AM |
Ebay dispute resolution | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 03-28-2005 03:51 PM |