Ebay seller returned cracked out slab

[perezfan]

You still see GAI graded cards in major Catalogue Auctions periodically. I recall a nice Ty Cobb T206 in the last REA Auction.

Do you think REA, Lelands, SCP or Heritage would (for one second) allow the winning bidder to crack it out on their own accord, and accept the returned raw card back, for a full refund? Especially with no notice given, or permission to do so?

The buyer took advantage of the seller, knowing that eBay's liberal return policy had him covered. He wanted the chance for a big payday with no risk, all completely at the expense of the seller.

As others have requested... Please post the Buyer's name.

[painthistorian]

NO auction house would accept a cracked out slab as a return, in fact very few would take back anything after won & paid for the reasoning of anything except maybe authenticity, if it was sold slabbed and was sold intact, pretty sure NO one tolerates that.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by perezfan

You still see GAI graded cards in major Catalogue Auctions periodically. I recall a nice Ty Cobb T206 in the last REA Auction.

Do you think REA, Lelands, SCP or Heritage would (for one second) allow the winning bidder to crack it out on their own accord, and accept the returned raw card back, for a full refund? Especially with no notice given, or permission to do so?

The buyer took advantage of the seller, knowing that eBay's liberal return policy had him covered. He wanted the chance for a big payday with no risk, all completely at the expense of the seller.

As others have requested... Please post the Buyer's name.

Bingo! Please out the buyer so I may block him.

[Mark17]

Does it matter to anyone that the seller also described it as Near Mint?

1933 GOUDEY LOU GEHRIG #160

GAI 7 GRADED

VERY RARE

NEAR MINT

GREAT CORNERS AND NICE EYE APPEAL

SMOKE FREE HOME

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Does it matter to anyone that the seller also described it as Near Mint?

1933 GOUDEY LOU GEHRIG #160

GAI 7 GRADED

VERY RARE

NEAR MINT

GREAT CORNERS AND NICE EYE APPEAL

SMOKE FREE HOME

Nah he is quoting the flip i assume...

However i got this list below from blowout of grading places in the past you can see below.

Does everyone really think that these 'grades' really matter from all of these guys that you couldnt return a card that was cracked out.



AAA
AAI ( American Authentication Inc)
ADVANCEDGRADING.COM
AGS (Advanced Grading Specialists)
ALL STAR GRADING
ASA (Accugrade Sportscard Authentication)
ASGC (All Star Grading Company)
BCCG (Beckett Collectors Club Grading)
BCG
BEARSTATS GRADING SERVICES
BGS (Beckett Grading Service)
BGUM (Beckett Game Used Memoabilia)
Blue Chip
BRG (Best Rate Grading)
BSVA

Capital Grading
CCS (Card Collector Services)
CEX (Certified Express)
CGA (Card Grading Authenticators)
CGS (Champs Grading Service)
CLG
Compugrade
CPG (Certified Pro Grading)
CSA (Certified Sports Authentication)
CSC (Sports Card Grading Service)
CSG
CTA
EGS (Express Grading Service)
FGA
FGS (Finest Grading Service)
GAI (Global Authentication Inc.) (Bankrupt)
GAI (Global Authority Inc) (new owners of GAI)
GEM
GEM Elite
GEM-Sports
GGI (Gem Grading Inc.)
GGS (Gem Grading Services)
GMA
GRA
GRADEMYCARDS.COM
GRADING UNLIMITED
IGX
IKON
ISA
KSA (Kressler Sports Authentication)
MAJOR LEAGUE GRADING
MAP
MGS (Masters Grading Services)
MGS (Mint Grading Service)
NASA (North American Sportscard Authentication)
PCCG (Pro's Choice Card Graders)
PCG (Professional Card Graders)
PGC (Premier Grading Certification)
PGC (Premier Grading Company -same as above?)
PGC (Pro Grade Certified)
PGI
PGS (Professional Grading Service)
PRE-Grading Service (uses screwdowns)
Premium Sports Grading
PRO (Pro Sports Grading)
PSA (Professional Sports Authenticator)
PSA (Pacific Sports Authority)
PSG (Pristine Sportscard Grading)
PTG
RGA
SBC (Superlative Baseball Card Certification)
SCD Sports Collectors Digest (SCD) folded and was sold to Sports Card Direct (SCD)
SGC (Sportscard Guaranty)
SNAGGLETOOTH
SPA (Authenticated)
Sportscard Grading Association
STADIUM CLUB GRADING
SWG (Southwest Card Grading)
TCG
TFA (The Final Authority)
TGA
UGS
USA (Ultimate Sportscard Authority)
Verisleeve (Sticker on Card Saver)
VGR (Venture 21)
VGS
VSA
VSG Vanguard
WCG (World Class Grading)

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Nah he is quoting the flip i assume...

So I can sell an altered card as NEAR MINT, as long as I am quoting someone else?

Well that is interesting to know.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The flip didn't say great corners and eye appeal.

But there are distinct issues here, I think. Yes, the seller inadvertently misrepresented the card by embellishing, in my opinion. He went beyond just selling it as is. I think he implied it was not altered. And as a result, the buyer would be entitled to a return for not as described. But in my opinion the buyer forfeited that with the crack out -- not as open and shut a question as some are making it, I don't think, but I still come out that way.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Suppose the buyer had asked the seller if it was OK to crack it out to have it reviewed because it's so difficult to cross a card in another company's holder. Would the seller really have said no, if you do I won't take it back, thereby suggesting he had no confidence in the card he just touted and sold? Something to consider.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The flip didn't say great corners and eye appeal.

But there are distinct issues here, I think. Yes, the seller inadvertently misrepresented the card by embellishing, in my opinion. He went beyond just selling it as is. I think he implied it was not altered. And as a result, the buyer would be entitled to a return for not as described. But in my opinion the buyer forfeited that with the crack out -- not as open and shut a question as some are making it, I don't think, but I still come out that way.

Peter, suppose a card doctor flattened and trimmed the corners of an asset in such a way that the only way the alterations could be detected was to measure the thickness (and its variations at the corners) and edges, and then somehow gets it into a high grade slab...

Does that mean he gets away with it? Because the only way his fraud can be discovered is the very thing that would void a return.

Isn't there some allowance regarding this holder, considering the fact it is grossly misleading and basically concealing a fraud? Wouldn't the buyer reimbursing the seller for the cost of a re-slab be an appropriate solution?

[nsaddict]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So I can sell an altered card as NEAR MINT, as long as I am quoting someone else?

Well that is interesting to know.

The card pictured is a "7". The description matched the card sold. And are you really suggesting PSA is credible in their opinion? I'm putting the odds at 50/50. Have you not seen what's been going on in the last 5/6 months? The buyer was a snake to crack it out period! And if you were the seller you'd be ok with getting back the card cracked out?

I'd be curious to see a poll on this topic?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So I can sell an altered card as NEAR MINT, as long as I am quoting someone else?

Well that is interesting to know.

You can sell the card with flip saying near mint and say its near mint. No returns on third party graded cards is a pretty common saying in the industry

[KaBooM]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So I can sell an altered card as NEAR MINT, as long as I am quoting someone else?

Well that is interesting to know.

C'mon. He was just restating the "NM" grade ascribed to the card by the grading company. I routinely do the same thing when I resell graded cards. Who on here has sold a graded "Near Mint 7" card and then advertised such as being "EX-MT" or lower?

[KaBooM]

I'm late to this thread but my $0.03:

#1 The seller did make a fairly big mistake by "accepting the return" before confirming as to whether the card had been broken out of the slab. This could very well have driven EBay's position to side with the "buyer". As a consumer, the more interesting precedent would be if the seller first insisted upon reasoning, photographic verification, etc. and then when discovering the slab had been broken, "rejected" the return. Would eBay have made the same ruling under this fact pattern?

#2 I routinely buy "PSA/SGC NM 7" commons from the late 50s/early 60s and break them out of the holders to simply take the newly acquired raw card and upgrade my existing raw card as I strive for a more centered raw card and may have minimum graded standard (of 8) on cards that I'll keep slabbed. While I am careful and usually successful, the cracking process in not foolproof and there have been a few times whereby the cracked raw card may have ended up with a slight ding or two. Before and after pictures may not capture this and for an 80 year old card the seller shouldn't be forced to take it on faith that the now raw card hasn't been degraded slightly in the cracking process.

#3. If one is selling an "off-brand" (for me that's simply non PSA/SGC) card on eBay, one should stipulate very clearly that under no circumstances will a cracked card return be accepted. IOW, the buyer is taking the full off-brand risk. May not be bullet proof with eBay and won't protect you in all scenarios but in concert with item #1 would have put this seller on better footing with eBay.

#4. I don't necessarily agree that the seller should have or would have already dabbled in the cross-over game with PSA/SGC. Early on when I started upgrading a lot of my raw stars with graded 7/8s I bought some off brand cards because they looked nice and were cheaper. I stopped doing that very early on and have weeded those cards out of my collection (other than 1 Beckett card that I still have) well before the latest "trimming scandal". So I find it entirely plausible that the seller may have felt the same and simply wanted to recoup roughly what he paid for the card knowing that GAI cards are inferior from a valuation standpoint.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by KaBooM

C'mon. He was just restating the "NM" grade ascribed to the card by the grading company. I routinely do the same thing when I resell graded cards. Who on here has sold a graded "Near Mint 7" card and then advertised such as being "EX-MT" or lower?

His full description was:

1933 GOUDEY LOU GEHRIG #160
GAI 7 GRADED
VERY RARE
NEAR MINT
GREAT CORNERS AND NICE EYE APPEAL
SMOKE FREE HOME

The "Great corners and nice eye appeal" wasn't GAI talking. But I get what you're saying. I don't think the seller was aware of any alterations.

When this thread started I was 60% on the side of the buyer because I'm tired of hearing about all the people, who pay big money thinking they are getting quality assets, learning later the asset was doctored. And I thought, well, in this instance the doctoring was caught, so good, that card never did deserve to be in a "7" holder.

But after this discussion, which I thought was worthwhile, I have come to decide that it would be too big a can of worms if people could routinely buy graded cards, crack them out, then return them. So now I'm more like 60% behind the seller I suppose. Reluctantly. I wish we had heard from the buyer in case there was more to his side of the story.

While some people brought chainsaws to the thread (I was called "Operating with a broken moral compass", Insane, Asinine, a Nerd, Stupid, and Ridiculous in one post alone,) others respectfully and articulately voiced their views, as you have,.

In the end I agree that if you buy a slabbed card, as a buyer you need to take your precautions up front (ask questions, trust the grading service, or be willing to risk the gamble,) and if you want to return a purchase it must be still sealed in its original slab undamaged, just as purchased.

[bigfanNY]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

Bingo! Please out the buyer so I may block him.

Originally Posted by perezfan

You still see GAI graded cards in major Catalogue Auctions periodically. I recall a nice Ty Cobb T206 in the last REA Auction.

Do you think REA, Lelands, SCP or Heritage would (for one second) allow the winning bidder to crack it out on their own accord, and accept the returned raw card back, for a full refund? Especially with no notice given, or permission to do so?

The buyer took advantage of the seller, knowing that eBay's liberal return policy had him covered. He wanted the chance for a big payday with no risk, all completely at the expense of the seller.

As others have requested... Please post the Buyer's name.

Again folks here keep saying buyer "took advantage of ebay policy" But all he did was click a button and ask for a refund. The SELLER CLICKED OK SEND IT BACK. WITHOUT CONTACTING THE BUYER AND ASKING ANY QUESTIONS. We cannot know if buyer would have said ok if seller said he would not refund. We will never know if buyer would have negotiated with the seller. Based on ebay rules Buyer thought spending $5k on an altered card. ( please don't say can we really believe PSA, most of us on this board trust them when they say altered) and started the process to talk with seller. Seller chose not to talk and pressed button for buyer to send it back.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Again folks here keep saying buyer "took advantage of ebay policy" But all he did was click a button and ask for a refund. The SELLER CLICKED OK SEND IT BACK. WITHOUT CONTACTING THE BUYER AND ASKING ANY QUESTIONS. We cannot know if buyer would have said ok if seller said he would not refund. We will never know if buyer would have negotiated with the seller. Based on ebay rules Buyer thought spending $5k on an altered card. ( please don't say can we really believe PSA, most of us on this board trust them when they say altered) and started the process to talk with seller. Seller chose not to talk and pressed button for buyer to send it back.

Yes but the seller probably assumed, reasonably, that it had not been cracked out.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yes but the seller probably assumed, reasonably, that it had not been cracked out.

Yeah, but that should scare people because I have a dead common T206 with a dead common back that is first graded and dead obviously trimmed. I have bought GAI for flipping, this one definitely won't.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Again folks here keep saying buyer "took advantage of ebay policy" But all he did was click a button and ask for a refund. The SELLER CLICKED OK SEND IT BACK. WITHOUT CONTACTING THE BUYER AND ASKING ANY QUESTIONS. We cannot know if buyer would have said ok if seller said he would not refund. We will never know if buyer would have negotiated with the seller. Based on ebay rules Buyer thought spending $5k on an altered card. ( please don't say can we really believe PSA, most of us on this board trust them when they say altered) and started the process to talk with seller. Seller chose not to talk and pressed button for buyer to send it back.

Quit justifying the technicalities of a return policy for a moment and look at the moral aspect. The buyer damaged the goods and took advantage. Bottom line this is a scummy individual.
If you can look at yourself in the mirror and say all of the actions taken by the purchaser is acceptable then you are part of the growing problem in this hobby of thieves and tricksters. (Not directed toward the person I quoted but this is just a response to the way of thinking). None of it is justified.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Quit justifying the technicalities of a return policy for a moment and look at the moral aspect. The buyer damaged the goods and took advantage. Bottom line this is a scummy individual.
If you can look at yourself in the mirror and say all of the actions taken by the purchaser is acceptable then you are part of the growing problem in this hobby of thieves and tricksters. (Not directed toward the person I quoted but this is just a response to the way of thinking). None of it is justified.

If we were talking about a different (highly vilified) seller, we might agree that doctored cards in high-grade holders is the problem in this hobby of thieves and tricksters.

A doctored card was outed. The seller can no longer use GAI's misrepresentation of it to sell it as near mint. I don't blame this seller of anything, but he is not entitled to get another shot at selling a now known doctored card at a near mint price, and that is all he has lost, with that cracked holder.

I do think the buyer should owe the seller for a new holder.

[x2drich2000]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I do think the buyer should owe the seller for a new holder.

Curious how you would feel about this whole thing if the seller sends it to SGC and it comes back with a numerical grade?

[bigfanNY]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Curious how you would feel about this whole thing if the seller sends it to SGC and it comes back with a numerical grade?

This has been bought up before if it had come back with a number grade I would side with the seller 100%.. I like to think the buyer would not even have asked for a refund if it came back with a number. My point is 100% if you sell altered cards you should refund buyer.
Now if the Seller sends it in to SGC and it comes back with a 6 or a 7 is the seller obligated to tell any future buyers that PSA said it was altered?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Curious how you would feel about this whole thing if the seller sends it to SGC and it comes back with a numerical grade?

We have been operating with limited and at times confusing information. My assumptions here are that the doctoring is not just a nuanced opinion (like the card being 1/64 inch too narrow) but something fairly obvious. The reason I assume this is that it would have been in PSA's best financial interest to have been able to give it a numeric grade and collect those grading fees. It was against their best interest to determine it to be altered.

Certainly if my assumptions are wrong, or if someone adds new information not known before, then the conclusions easily might change. As I have said before, even if PSA gave it a low numeric grade, I would be 100% with the seller. The issue is the doctoring (fraud) that somebody performed on that thing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We have been operating with limited and at times confusing information. My assumptions here are that the doctoring is not just a nuanced opinion (like the card being 1/64 inch too narrow) but something fairly obvious. The reason I assume this is that it would have been in PSA's best financial interest to have been able to give it a numeric grade and collect those grading fees. It was against their best interest to determine it to be altered.

Certainly if my assumptions are wrong, or if someone adds new information not known before, then the conclusions easily might change. As I have said before, even if PSA gave it a low numeric grade, I would be 100% with the seller. The issue is the doctoring (fraud) that somebody performed on that thing.

As previously mentioned, PSA gets paid for its review, not contingent on the result.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Mark17

We have been operating with limited and at times confusing information. My assumptions here are that the doctoring is not just a nuanced opinion (like the card being 1/64 inch too narrow) but something fairly obvious. The reason I assume this is that it would have been in PSA's best financial interest to have been able to give it a numeric grade and collect those grading fees. It was against their best interest to determine it to be altered.

Certainly if my assumptions are wrong, or if someone adds new information not known before, then the conclusions easily might change. As I have said before, even if PSA gave it a low numeric grade, I would be 100% with the seller. The issue is the doctoring (fraud) that somebody performed on that thing.

Not only does PSA collect its fee.... they are probably being more stringent than ever with their grading. Given the thousands of visible "mistakes" they've made, and the new cards that are exposed daily, their wonderful management team has surely instructed the troops to be tougher with their grading standards... at least until the heat is off.

People here are giving way too much credence to PSA.

[Goudey77]

Originally Posted by Mark17

If we were talking about a different (highly vilified) seller, we might agree that doctored cards in high-grade holders is the problem in this hobby of thieves and tricksters.

A doctored card was outed. The seller can no longer use GAI's misrepresentation of it to sell it as near mint. I don't blame this seller of anything, but he is not entitled to get another shot at selling a now known doctored card at a near mint price, and that is all he has lost, with that cracked holder.

I do think the buyer should owe the seller for a new holder.

How you can justify damaging an item is beyond disbelief...
You don't buy GAI, SGC, BGS and PSA slabs thinking you can submit/review to another TPG then use the results as grounds for returning an item in raw form.

You are buying the item as is.

I can usually buy cards in SGC holders for less than PSA. Does that mean I should return them if they don't cross over?

Your moral compass is completely broken sir. This is the type of insanity that goes on among fellow collectors and the very reason this hobby will collapse from asinine behavior.

I have a love hate relationship with the hobby. I love the cards. I don't love the nerds and stupidity that this hobby seems to attract.

Ridiculous discussion period. I thought most of you are better than this.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Goudey77

How you can justify damaging an item is beyond disbelief...

This is a double-negative. You are actually saying it is believable.

Originally Posted by Goudey77

Your moral compass is completely broken sir. This is the type of insanity that goes on among fellow collectors and the very reason this hobby will collapse from asinine behavior.

I have a love hate relationship with the hobby. I love the cards. I don't love the nerds and stupidity that this hobby seems to attract.

Ridiculous discussion period. I thought most of you are better than this.

I don't think a guy who buys an asset described by the seller as near mint, great eye appeal, sharp corners which turns out to be doctored should be stuck with it and I am:

Operating with a broken moral compass
Insane
Asinine
a Nerd
Stupid
Ridiculous

Well, at least the art of civil discourse is alive and well.

[JollyElm]

If nothing else, this thread is a nice tutorial for explaining how great the 'ignore' function on this site is. Click.

[Goudey77]

Unbelievable

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Mark17

If we were talking about a different (highly vilified) seller, we might agree that doctored cards in high-grade holders is the problem in this hobby of thieves and tricksters.

A doctored card was outed. The seller can no longer use GAI's misrepresentation of it to sell it as near mint. I don't blame this seller of anything, but he is not entitled to get another shot at selling a now known doctored card at a near mint price, and that is all he has lost, with that cracked holder.

I do think the buyer should owe the seller for a new holder.

Yeah the same holder as before..just contact GAI