PSA Appraisal Values

[BobC]

Originally Posted by incugator

PSA has challenged a few cards that I have submitted in the past year and it seems like they believe their assessment on values is the governing rule. In the past, it used to be SMR, but now they are going off of recent public sales only to determine the value of cards. They are not licensed appraisers and they are consistently referencing the submission contract even though California law supersedes their contract. Does anybody know what type of legal action can be taken to challenge PSA's authority on assessed value of cards, especially when they are upcharging people hundreds of dollars per card?

Not sure you'll be able to do much about it. Depends on exactly what they have in their contracts, which I am totally unfamiliar with. They are not stupid business operators though, and my guess is they somehow have the contract, which you would have agreed to in submitting a card to them, worded in such a way that you aren't able to look for some independent, qualified appraiser for help. My guess is that they have reserved that right to solely determine the value themselves, with no one else able to question them. Speculation on my part though.

Besides, the legal costs to fight them would probably be so much more than you could ever hope to win back from them that no one would likely try taking them on to begin with.

[incugator]

This is true if it does not violate California appraisal laws. I'm guessing California has laws in place that allow for values to be contested. Right now PSA is telling customers that the contract is law (which it definitely is not). I just dont know what the law is.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by incugator

This is true if it does not violate California appraisal laws. I'm guessing California has laws in place that allow for values to be contested. Right now PSA is telling customers that the contract is law (which it definitely is not). I just dont know what the law is.

That is just it, PSA is based in California, right? And remember, until just a year ago or so, they were a publicly traded company as well. Their attorneys would most likely be extremely well versed with California laws and what is and isn't allowable under them in regard to the issue you bring up. Again, am not an attorney, nor have I ever seen one of their grading agreements/contracts, but still speculate they have their I's dotted and their T's crossed. LOL

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

That is just it, PSA is based in California, right? And remember, until just a year ago or so, they were a publicly traded company as well. Their attorneys would most likely be extremely well versed with California laws and what is and isn't allowable under them in regard to the issue you bring up. Again, am not an attorney, nor have I ever seen one of their grading agreements/contracts, but still speculate they have their I's dotted and their T's crossed. LOL

I would not assume any such thing. This isn't Apple or Microsoft. I haven't seen the provisions or the applicable statute so have no opinion, but the fact that PSA is saying it or it's in their contract means little.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would not assume any such thing. This isn't Apple or Microsoft. I haven't seen the provisions or the applicable statute so have no opinion, but the fact that PSA is saying it or it's in their contract means little.

Exactly why I made sure to say I'm not an attorney, nor have I ever seen one of their contracts. LOL Purely speculating and giving them the benefit of the doubt to have put language or clauses in their agreements/contracts that gives them the ultimate authority when it comes to something like determining what something is worth in regard to upcharges for grading services. Also still think that there's not going to be enough of a difference in an upcharge for any disputed grading fee to make someone want to risk the potential legal fees it could cost to take anyone to court.

Also, I have yet to hear of a single legal case being brought where someone has taken them to court over their grading guarantees, let alone win a case for such against them. And a case like that would most likely be for way more money than a dispute about a grading fee upcharge would ever be. So again, in all the decades they've been in business now, if no one as of yet has taken them to court for the latter, I doubt anyone is going to want to really risk wanting to go against them for the former.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

Double post.

Their you have to sue us in Orange County provision, which is enforceable, is a hurdle. The fact that the American legal system does not typically award a plaintiff his attorney's fees is a hurdle. And yes, the relatively modest amounts that typically would be at stake are a disincentive. Do we know for a fact they never have been sued over a grade? It's certainly possible people made demands that resulted in confidential settlements, for one thing. If I were representing someone I'd almost certainly try to resolve it that way.

[ahmanfan]

Nobody is forcing you to use PSA. If you use them it’s their rules I would suppose.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ahmanfan

Nobody is forcing you to use PSA. If you use them it’s their rules I would suppose.

Being forced to enter a contract is not the standard for being able to challenge a provision as unenforceable.