Ebay seller returned cracked out slab

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only value that GAI holder had was the misinformation on it, which could've been used to foist a doctored card onto the next unsuspecting buyer.

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

In the world of hypotheticals, maybe the buyer cracked it out, got a 7, took an altered one and returned it. Double dipped, in effect.

Seller is still screwed.

[nsaddict]

Originally Posted by nsaddict View Post
If the card would have crossed as a PSA 7, would the buyer have sent the seller 5K in appreciation? Certainly not, I’m in the camp you crack it out it’s yours! Nothing to lose only gain. Total 100% BS!

Same result if you open a wax pack? < Peter’s response ( not sure how to quote in blue box fashion)
__________________


So Peter, if I buy a 1961 Topps unopened pack and open it, I can send it back if I don’t pull a Mantle?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Plus, how do we prove it was a fake? Take your word for it that the cards were mixed series? Then you merrily return a bunch of NM commons that you had laying around while grading the Mantle you ACTUALLY pulled.

In my hypothetical, I stated that the buyer of the pack opens it while on camera, for a YouTube video. Let's say a few honest, reputable witnesses are also there.

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Again there's a difference between legal and ethical here, but I feel the buyer acted unethically as well since again (and again, and again) there is no need to crack a card to get a new grade.

When we were discussing someone starting a new, technically modern and objective grading service, many, many posters here commented that it was essential to look at the edge of a card to determine whether it had been trimmed. Also the thickness of the card is important, and variances in thickness, like whether the corners are thinner, indicating they may have been spread wider so as to trim them sharp.

Now you seem to be saying, in the passage I bolded above, that cards can be graded, and doctored cards including trim and corner rework can be identified, while the card is still slabbed. You're also implying the texture of a card is not important to a grader, or when identifying doctored or counterfeit cards.

So, which is it? Can a $5,000 card be properly evaluated while in a plastic holder (rendering such attributes as card thickness and edge inspection impossible to examine,) or is the evaluation process involved enough to require the examination of the card while out of the holder?

The only way to know what is in an unopened pack is to open it. If that act reveals a deception, then the pack was sold under false pretenses, whether the actual seller was aware of it or not. In this case, the fraudulent pack cannot be resold to someone else and that is a good thing.

The only way to know if the Gehrig was genuine or doctored was to give it a thorough inspection, meaning, cracked out of that virtually valueless holder. This act revealed a deception. The card, when sold, was mis-represented, whether the actual seller was aware of it or not.

In this case, the card can still be resold for what it truly is - the reason the seller is upset is that the card can not be resold for what it was pretending to be.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

So Peter, if I buy a 1961 Topps unopened pack and open it, I can send it back if I don’t pull a Mantle?

No, because I'm assuming in your hypo you got what you paid for. But if you pay for an unaltered card and receive an altered card then, yes, you should be able to send it back.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Actually, that holder had one other value. It positively identifies that as the same card originally sold. That's one possibility no one seems to mention. If it was my card, that would be my concern. If the buyer returns a trimmed 1933 Lou Gehrig, how can I be sure it's actually the card that was in the GAI slab? The buyer supposedly bought the card and got it regraded by PSA in one week. Many wondered how he was able to get such fast service. What if he didn't return the card he was sold, but a card he had submitted that was rejected by PSA? He didn't even return the GAI slab it was in. Why not?

There are plenty of pictures of the card that was sold on ebay, right on the listing itself. Comparing the card sold to the card returned would be simple.

[bobbyw8469]

In this case, the card can still be resold for what it truly is - the reason the seller is upset is that the card can not be resold for what it was pretending to be.

As much as you don't want to believe it, the GAI holder did have SOME value - if only for the sheer gamblers aspect of it as to why this buyer bought it in the first place. GAI IS (well.....was....at one time) a respected name. Mike Baker IS a good grader. The buyer who cracked it out was hoping to make a monetary score by getting it into a PSA holder. He knew he was not getting a fake card. The same can't be said for a PRO holder. So, yes, the GAI card DID have some value. But now the seller doesn't even have that. He is forced to refund, and is getting a card that doesn't even have the GAI stamp of approval anymore. His option is now, as much as I hate to say it, is to play the "grading" game!!! What if it eventually gets into a PSA 7 holder?? All of the sudden it is now deemed "acceptable". I, for one, am dismayed that this is what the baseball card collection has become.

[Marchillo]

Originally Posted by Mark17

No, because I'm assuming in your hypo you got what you paid for. But if you pay for an unaltered card and receive an altered card then, yes, you should be able to send it back.

Some cards receive a minimum size designation that haven’t been trimmed. They get resubmitted and get a grade. So if a card has a PSA grade, gets cracked and gets submitted to SGC and gets an A after a crack out is this on the seller as well?

I think the bottom line here is that a crossover can be done without a crack out. The seemingly greedy buyer didn’t want that influence (which is insane). The card should be graded whatever it deserves. After the crack out I think the return is void. Unless there is proof of intent by the seller.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

As much as you don't want to believe it, the GAI holder did have SOME value - if only for the sheer gamblers aspect of it as to why this buyer bought it in the first place. GAI IS (well.....was....at one time) a respected name. Mike Baker IS a good grader. The buyer who cracked it out was hoping to make a monetary score by getting it into a PSA holder. He knew he was not getting a fake card. The same can't be said for a PRO holder. So, yes, the GAI card DID have some value. But now the seller doesn't even have that. He is forced to refund, and is getting a card that doesn't even have the GAI stamp of approval anymore. His option is now, as much as I hate to say it, is to play the "grading" game!!! What if it eventually gets into a PSA 7 holder?? All of the sudden it is now deemed "acceptable". I, for one, am dismayed that this is what the baseball card collection has become.

The root problem is this: The card is doctored. The seller wants to sell it at a price commensurate with that of an undoctored card. That GAI holder gave him cover, now that cover is removed, and the card stands naked of its previous misrepresentation. It is what it is.

How many people on this site keep repeating: Buy the card, not the holder.

My opinion is that if had graded a PSA 1, I would be 100% on the side of the seller. We see all sorts of examples of grading companies having a difference of opinion on relative grade. But when a card is doctored, that is a whole different thing. That's deception on the part of somebody (probably not the seller, but somebody.)

[bobbyw8469]

The root problem is this: The card is doctored.

Says who?? PSA???? PSA missed a ton of doctored cards. GAI says it wasn't. What if it gets resubmitted and actually gets a SGC and/or PSA grade?? Is it no longer doctored?? This whole grading thing has gotten kinda insane.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Says who?? PSA???? PSA missed a ton of doctored cards. GAI says it wasn't. What if it gets resubmitted and actually gets a SGC and/or PSA grade?? Is it no longer doctored?? This whole grading thing has gotten kinda insane.

Agreed, more details regarding the (alleged) doctoring would be helpful.

As I said before, I think it's way easier to miss a doctored card than to see alterations that do not exist.

You and others make good points. It's a good discussion where I think we all see each others' point of view, and just put more weight on one side of the argument or the other.

Assuming the card is, in fact, doctored, I am glad it has been outed, and not still floating around in that 7 holder.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Now let's examine it from the seller's POV. If the seller thought he had an unaltered NM card, why didn't he try to get it into an SGC or PSA holder? I would ask Dave directly, but I've already done so multiple times.

Is this really a serious question? 3,427 of your last 4,687 posts are linking to cards graded wrong by SGC and PSA.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Is this really a serious question? 3,427 of your last 4,687 posts are linking to cards graded wrong by SGC and PSA.

Let me check your math, Ben.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Is this really a serious question? 3,427 of your last 4,687 posts are linking to cards graded wrong by SGC and PSA.

All the more reason to try, maybe they would have missed the alteration.

But seriously, I don't understand why, unless he knew the card was bad, the OP didn't try given the huge upside.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by nsaddict

So Peter, if I buy a 1961 Topps unopened pack and open it, I can send it back if I don’t pull a Mantle?

It looks like, given the new precedent, yes. You could buy a GAI slabbed pack, crack it out, search it, pull anything you want and replace it with whatever you want, reseal it, send it to PSA knowing its going to fail, then send it back to the seller, saying it failed, and get a refund. Pretty sure that's the pack equivalent of what happened here, but correct me if I'm wrong.

[Aplyon86]

Originally Posted by conor912

It looks like, given the new precedent, yes. You could buy a GAI slabbed pack, crack it out, search it, pull anything you want and replace it with whatever you want, reseal it, send it to PSA knowing its going to fail, then send it back to the seller, saying it failed, and get a refund. Pretty sure that's the pack equivalent of what happened here, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Agree 100% (assuming the seller didn't know it was altered or try to cross it over with the same result). Anyone who agrees with the buyer, do you have and GAI cards on eBay and if so, what is your eBay ID? You have a new customer with me.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[ullmandds]

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

[t206fanatic]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

only potentially compelling argument not siding wholly w the seller I've seen is:

do the sellers of cards in crapslabs (non PSA/SGC) have any responsibility for checking to see if the card inside is altered? Peter asked a number of times if the seller had attempted to have the Gehrig crossed over, without response.

[icurnmedic]

It is funny how many of us on the forum all the sudden put merit to PSA's ability to grade and with greater professionalism than GAI, when for months I have been reading otherwise. The seller got the shaft, like it or disagree, but this sets a potentially game changing precedent. What if it were a SGC holder cracked and sent to PSA? Does that change anything? Not sure of the value of the card , but I am in the camp , if you send the GAI holder to PSA, It will NOT be crossed over, so you are throwing good money out the window. And the GAI holder does offer value, albeit not much.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by icurnmedic

It is funny how many of us on the forum all the sudden put merit to PSA's ability to grade and with greater professionalism than GAI, when for months I have been reading otherwise. The seller got the shaft, like it or disagree, but this sets a potentially game changing precedent. What if it were a SGC holder cracked and sent to PSA? Does that change anything? Not sure of the value of the card , but I am in the camp , if you send the GAI holder to PSA, It will NOT be crossed over, so you are throwing good money out the window. And the GAI holder does offer value, albeit not much.

Agreed

[Rhotchkiss]

See the thread called "1928 Harrington's Babe Ruth on Ebay"

To those supporting the buyer on this, I ask two questions:

1. So, the high bidder of that card can crack it out and send it raw into PSA (or SGC), and if PSA says its altered because of the odd right edge, the high bidder should be able to return the card? If not, why not?

2. Where do you get the crack (no pun intended) you are smoking?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

I agree, its buyer beware when they buy a card in that inferior holder If they want to take the risk, thats their risk.

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

You buy it? OK. You break and expect a refund when its not OK? Tempus Fuggit.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I agree, its buyer beware when they buy a card in that inferior holder If they want to take the risk, thats their risk.

Question is...at what point will a PSA holder be considered inferior???

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

Nothing surprises me anymore. This hobby has some real shocking perspectives from all walks of life. I think it’s mostly mid life crisis personality disorders.
There is truly a mental disorder aspect to the madness. I don’t know how legitimate businesses take any of the alleged claims seriously.

I’m almost embarrassed to call myself a collector these days.
I don’t take a negative stance very much but this instance kind of did it.
Ok rant over.

[mq711]

Not sure the buyer took a risk here, with over 10k eBay transactions he is probably very familiar with their return/refund policy and took full advantage of it when the item was determined to be altered. Would be a nice case for Judge Judy to hear but apparently its okay under eBays rules.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by mq711

Not sure the buyer took a risk here, with over 10k eBay transactions he is probably very familiar with their return/refund policy and took full advantage of it when the item was determined to be altered. Would be a nice case for Judge Judy to hear but apparently its okay under eBays rules.

I agree and I wouldn't have any issue with the return as long as the card was not cracked out of its original holder.

[Rhotchkiss]

[QUOTE=ullmandds;1929915]I agree and I wouldn't have any issue with the return as long as the card was not cracked out of its original holder.[/QUOTE

If you crack, no give back.

[steve B]

I'm surprised nobody has really explained the timeline.

Seller to buyer to PSA to buyer ….three trips through the post office, plus time at PSA even giving the benefit of the doubt that the buyer could turn the card around and remail the same day.

And all that happened in one week?
Even with express mail, three days are used up in transit.
Yes, PSA has faster times for higher value items, but does anyone have recent experience with the time it takes to even get logged in?


I just don't see that as probable.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by steve B

I'm surprised nobody has really explained the timeline.

Seller to buyer to PSA to buyer ….three trips through the post office, plus time at PSA even giving the benefit of the doubt that the buyer could turn the card around and remail the same day.

And all that happened in one week?
Even with express mail, three days are used up in transit.
Yes, PSA has faster times for higher value items, but does anyone have recent experience with the time it takes to even get logged in?


I just don't see that as probable.

good point

[steve B]

GAI and SGC slabs do usually leave enough visible to examine a cards edges.
PSA will often block some of the edge of a full size card, undersize should be visible.

I'm not sure about Beckett. It's been a while since I looked at the one or two Beckett cards I have.

Even the Acu-Grade slab shows more than enough edge to tell if a card is trimmed. (Unfortunately for me, or not one of my Delongs is Acu-Grade 7, and it is trimmed. Of course, if it wasn't I wouldn't own it... )

[steve B]

How many threads are there about resubs where a card is a nice 5-6, gets cracked and resubmitted, comes back a 3 gets cracked and resubbed, comes back trimmed, cracked and resubbed and comes back a 7...

Without seeing it close up, I suspect it's worth another try or two at PSA.
Now whether the other two opinions are right, that's a toss up.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by steve B

I'm surprised nobody has really explained the timeline.

Seller to buyer to PSA to buyer ….three trips through the post office, plus time at PSA even giving the benefit of the doubt that the buyer could turn the card around and remail the same day.

And all that happened in one week?
Even with express mail, three days are used up in transit.
Yes, PSA has faster times for higher value items, but does anyone have recent experience with the time it takes to even get logged in?


I just don't see that as probable.

I wondered about that very thing early on in this thread. It doesn't add up to me.

The OP has held back some info. For example, unless I missed it, the person who purchased the card on eBay hasn't been identified. Additionally, the unnamed buyer hasn't come on here (so far as I know) to fill in any details.

So, we're left to wonder, discuss, and piece things together using incomplete information. Along the way, this thread has generated approximately 200 responses. Two opinions have been shared repeatedly:

1. Case was cracked open - the sale should be final
2. Card was altered but sold as near mint - buyer should get a refund

To me, neither position is entirely right or entirely wrong. That is what makes this such a fascinating discussion. It's also what may lead to a most remarkable scenario.

Both buyer and seller can argue that they deserve to keep their money. Ultimately, both of them may get to do just that.

The buyer already got their refund through eBay. The seller can (and likely will) fight that through PayPal or their bank. One possible outcome is this:

Buyer gets to keep their refund
Seller eventually gets paid
At least one company foots the bill as the cost of doing business

And, of course, seller still has the card...we think.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by steve B

I'm surprised nobody has really explained the timeline.

Seller to buyer to PSA to buyer ….three trips through the post office, plus time at PSA even giving the benefit of the doubt that the buyer could turn the card around and remail the same day.

And all that happened in one week?
Even with express mail, three days are used up in transit.
Yes, PSA has faster times for higher value items, but does anyone have recent experience with the time it takes to even get logged in?


I just don't see that as probable.

Maybe I am confused. Ebay says it sold Oct 14th and OP's first post was Nov 7th. That is 3 weeks of time and I am sure all of that could easily happen in 3 weeks.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Eric72

I wondered about that very thing early on in this thread. It doesn't add up to me.

The OP has held back some info. For example, unless I missed it, the person who purchased the card on eBay hasn't been identified. Additionally, the unnamed buyer hasn't come on here (so far as I know) to fill in any details.

So, we're left to wonder, discuss, and piece things together using incomplete information. Along the way, this thread has generated approximately 200 responses. Two opinions have been shared repeatedly:

1. Case was cracked open - the sale should be final
2. Card was altered but sold as near mint - buyer should get a refund

To me, neither position is entirely right or entirely wrong. That is what makes this such a fascinating discussion. It's also what may lead to a most remarkable scenario.

Both buyer and seller can argue that they deserve to keep their money. Ultimately, both of them may get to do just that.

The buyer already got their refund through eBay. The seller can (and likely will) fight that through PayPal or their bank. One possible outcome is this:

Buyer gets to keep their refund
Seller eventually gets paid
At least one company foots the bill as the cost of doing business

And, of course, seller still has the card...we think.

Thank you, Eric!!

While some on these threads have been frightened by this conversation:

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

And others have said that an opposing view is evidence of a personality disorder:

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Nothing surprises me anymore. This hobby has some real shocking perspectives from all walks of life. I think it’s mostly mid life crisis personality disorders.
There is truly a mental disorder aspect to the madness. I don’t know how legitimate businesses take any of the alleged claims seriously.

I’m almost embarrassed to call myself a collector these days.
I don’t take a negative stance very much but this instance kind of did it.
Ok rant over.

You, Eric, have nicely, and in a respectful, non-insulting way, summarized this discussion by pointing out that there are two perspectives that each have some validity.

The point of a discussion like this isn't to "win" it, but to share perspectives. When someone says that such a discussion makes them "almost embarrassed to call myself a collector these days", or that the discussion itself is "downright scary" that's disappointing.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Thank you, Eric!!

While some on these threads have been frightened by this conversation:



And others have said that an opposing view is evidence of a personality disorder:



You, Eric, have nicely, and in a respectful, non-insulting way, summarized this discussion by pointing out that there are two perspectives that each have some validity.

The point of a discussion like this isn't to "win" it, but to share perspectives. When someone says that such a discussion makes them "almost embarrassed to call myself a collector these days", or that the discussion itself is "downright scary" that's disappointing.

I agree that this is a weird thread with 2 types.

1) plain and simple the item returned was not the item sold and buyer should not get a refund for returning an altered product.

2) people making all sorts of excuses on why someone can buy an item alter it and return it for a full refund. This one really bafles me but I doubt there is any subject we all agree on.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I agree that this is a weird thread with 2 types.

1) plain and simple the item returned was not the item sold and buyer should not get a refund for returning an altered product.

2) people making all sorts of excuses on why someone can buy an item alter it and return it for a full refund. This one really bafles me but I doubt there is any subject we all agree on.

Ben, if you buy a Rolex watch that has elaborate packaging, open it, and discover fraud, are you saying you cannot return it because it is opened?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Bill, if you buy a Rolex watch that has elaborate packaging, open it, and discover fraud, are you saying you cannot return it because it is opened?

Mike that doesn't even make sense, plus it is totally irrelevant to what really happened.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Mike that doesn't even make sense, plus it is totally irrelevant to what really happened.

Biff,
It is quite similar. Maybe the buyer could've returned the card and added $20 for the cost of the cracked holder. Would that be fair?

[Prof_Plum]

So maybe the question is of what value does the packaging of an item have relative to the actual item value. Clearly you can return many items (watches, electronics, etc) after you've damage the package. In contrast, when it comes to collectibles, the package has actual value and destroying the package reduces the value of said collectible. But somewhere in between is a large gray area.

Perhaps for future GAI sales, one should sell the holder, not the card inside. For example, I have this near mint intact GAI 7 holder for sale, $3000...and I'll throw in the card for free. If the buyer should brake the GAI holder in hopes of getting the card in a PSA holder, he can't ask for his money back because he paid for the intact GAI holder.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Biff,
It is quite similar. Maybe the buyer could've returned the card and added $20 for the cost of the cracked holder. Would that be fair?

George, you can add all the if's and but's you want, plain and simple the buyer altered the item and should not get a refund. Go to Walmart or where ever you shop and buy a coat. Then cut off the sleeves and try and return it. How is that different?

[toolifedave]

Originally Posted by Stampsfan

Exactly. And here is my opinion before my rant below. "Buyer Beware" became "Buyers Remorse"; he took a gamble and lost, and now he wants his money back after altering of the purchase. The seller is not Costco or Home Depot, where you can return almost anything.



Not sure how you can determine intent of the seller was to sell an altered card, or sell a GAI graded card.

And we all are assuming that GAI is incorrect and PSA is correct. Maybe the opposite is true. Not saying it is, I am simply taking a contrarian approach. Forgive me, but I may have read somewhere on this site about the odd mistake PSA makes.

Finally, I have to say a lot of what is going on here frustrates me about some people on this site.

A new guy with 21 previous posts comes on here, tells his story about how the product he sold that was returned altered, and in certainly less valuable state. He is reaching out to see if he is nuts, or what should be the protocol. Regardless of the holder, he sold a product.

What he gets back is (ballpark) 50% understanding him, and 50% accusing him of trying to pull a fast one. The truth is we truly don't know what his motives are, and we truly don't know what the buyers motives are (myself included). It's all conjecture. Then, after being grilled, as a new poster he is trying to play by the rules and is unsure whether he should post the buyers eBay ID. He gets crucified for that too, like he's hiding something.

Frankly some of the replies from the conspiracy theorists to the newbie are shameful. Likely nobody knows this guy at all, yet yet many of us are incredibly judgmental. If I were in his position, I'd probably go radio silent too, and not read or post here again.

I'll probably get crucified too for this post, but I am OK with my position. I'm old and comfortable with that.

Bob, Thank you

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Prof_Plum

So maybe the question is of what value does the packaging of an item have relative to the actual item value. Clearly you can return many items (watches, electronics, etc) after you've damage the package. In contrast, when it comes to collectibles, the package has actual value and destroying the package reduces the value of said collectible. But somewhere in between is a large gray area.

Perhaps for future GAI sales, one should sell the holder, not the card inside. For example, I have this near mint intact GAI 7 holder for sale, $3000...and I'll throw in the card for free. If the buyer should brake the GAI holder in hopes of getting the card in a PSA holder, he can't ask for his money back because he paid for the intact GAI holder.

I'm not sure if you are being tongue-in-cheek or not, but actually, I think this is a really good idea and solve the problem. If this was the case, I would totally support the seller's right to not have to accept the return. And in this scenario, the card could be outright counterfeit, not just altered, and it would make no difference.

I find your idea to be an elegant solution. Then it's a clear "buyer beware" deal and both buyer and seller understand this up front. Sort of like buying a grab bag where the contents are unknown at time of purchase.

[BabyRuth]

Let's lighten it up a bit
I love threads that talk about GAI Gehrigs and Rolex

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bnorth

George, you can add all the if's and but's you want, plain and simple the buyer altered the item and should not get a refund. Go to Walmart or where ever you shop and buy a coat. Then cut off the sleeves and try and return it. How is that different?

Milton, the product was the Gehrig card and I am assuming it was returned undamaged.

Suppose the buyer had removed the card for inspection in such a way that the holder was undamaged. He discovers the card is doctored. Would it be OK for him to put the now known doctored card back into the original GAI 7 holder and return to the seller in the identical condition it was received?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BabyRuth

Let's lighten it up a bit
I love threads that talk about GAI Gehrigs and Rolex

Me too!

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all the information out there at this moment and the proven ineptitude of basically all of the major third-party graders... It is downright scary to me the opinions of many of you that side with the buyer here.

Truth. It's easy to play devil's advocate when YOU aren't the seller!

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Milton, the product was the Gehrig card and I am assuming it was returned undamaged.

Suppose the buyer had removed the card for inspection in such a way that the holder was undamaged. He discovers the card is doctored. Would it be OK for him to put the now known doctored card back into the original GAI 7 holder and return to the seller in the identical condition it was received?

Simon(not sure why you started this but it is fun), the product was a Gehrig card in a GAI slab.

Have a great day everyone.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Simon(not sure why you started this but it is fun), the product was a Gehrig card in a GAI slab.

Have a great day everyone.

So.....Suppose the buyer had removed the card for inspection in such a way that the holder was undamaged. He discovers the card is doctored. Would it be OK for him to put the now known doctored card back into the original GAI 7 holder and return to the seller in the identical condition it was received?

[cardsnstuff]

Originally Posted by bnorth

George, you can add all the if's and but's you want, plain and simple the buyer altered the item and should not get a refund. Go to Walmart or where ever you shop and buy a coat. Then cut off the sleeves and try and return it. How is that different?

Excellent Point....