Chris Morales appears in court for an autograph case, read about the results.

[thetruthisoutthere]

I won't include the link to the below item that sold as I will not give them any free advertising, but look at this horrific Mantle forgery certed by Chris Morales, Forensic Investigator. The winning bid was $8.00. Yes, $8.00.

WWW-1.jpg

WWW-2.jpg

[GrayGhost]

As you have said in your videos Chris, people should REALIZE that 8.00 sales of Mantle signed photos are RIDICULOUS. People themselves are morons. When something sells THAT Cheap or like in the Roach's, signed Hoss Radbourne and Lincoln "cuts" and the like go so cheap, don't they ask why? People are too lazy to get proper QUALIFIED opinions.

The crooks still buy and flip, but now, more people are hopefully going to realize if it walks like Chris Morales, talks like Chris Morales, it sure is most likely A FAKE!!

[mdschulze]

Let's see if I understand this correctly.... If I purchased a certified autographed item from an auction house that was later deemed a forgery, would I have any legal ramifications as a buyer? If so, who would be held accountable... the auction house or the authenticator? I'm no attorney but I would think that since the auction house is listing the item as authentic, they should be on the hook on behalf of the duped buyer Once they refund my $$, then the auction house would have to get their money back from the item's original owner.... then the owner would have to pursue the authenticator for a refund. At this time, the authenticator can use the line, "Well, it was my expert opinion" and get off free and clear without issuing a refund or face any criminal charges.

Is this how these situations typically play out or does the auction house use verbage like "buyer beware" and the initial request for a refund never makes it down the chain to the authenticator. I've never purchased anything from an auction house so I apologize for all of the questions.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by mdschulze

Let's see if I understand this correctly.... If I purchased a certified autographed item from an auction house that was later deemed a forgery, would I have any legal ramifications as a buyer? If so, who would be held accountable... the auction house or the authenticator? I'm no attorney but I would think that since the auction house is listing the item as authentic, they should be on the hook on behalf of the duped buyer Once they refund my $$, then the auction house would have to get their money back from the item's original owner.... then the owner would have to pursue the authenticator for a refund. At this time, the authenticator can use the line, "Well, it was my expert opinion" and get off free and clear without issuing a refund or face any criminal charges.

Is this how these situations typically play out or does the auction house use verbage like "buyer beware" and the initial request for a refund never makes it down the chain to the authenticator. I've never purchased anything from an auction house so I apologize for all of the questions.

I've never purchased from an auction house either, but I would think if an item was discovered not to be authentic, then the auction house would have to issue you a refund, and then deal with the authenticator. That, to me, would be the proper and correct way of handling a situation like that.

[Big Dave]

A lot of auction houses list the authenticator for an item and state that if you are not "comfortable with the authentication or authenticator", then do not bid as there are no returns.

Very few auction houses will accept a return, regardless. It is a buyer beware market, and do your homework. That is why most of them will not accept credit cards, because if they do, the buyer has a recourse if they don't like the item for whatever reason.

Even if you go to live auctions where memorabilia or anything is being sold, the items are sold "as is, where is" regardless of any COAs.

There are always going to be differences of opinion on the authenticity of an item, even the so called experts disagree on many items.

I seriously doubt this industry or authenticators will ever be regulated.

The only regulation there is, is via the money in your pocket.

Originally Posted by Big Dave

A lot of auction houses list the authenticator for an item and state that if you are not "comfortable with the authentication or authenticator", then do not bid as there are no returns.

Very few auction houses will accept a return, regardless. It is a buyer beware market, and do your homework. That is why most of them will not accept credit cards, because if they do, the buyer has a recourse if they don't like the item for whatever reason.

Even if you go to live auctions where memorabilia or anything is being sold, the items are sold "as is, where is" regardless of any COAs.

There are always going to be differences of opinion on the authenticity of an item, even the so called experts disagree on many items.

I seriously doubt this industry or authenticators will ever be regulated.

The only regulation there is, is via the money in your pocket.

Doesn't the original post in this thread, however, show that it's possible to sue auction houses successfully for selling forgeries? Might there then be a way, via multiple, similar suits against one auction house, or via one monster suit encompassing a whole pile of forgeries, to show a pattern that ultimately compels the house to divulge the consignors/forgers?

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Karl Mattson

Doesn't the original post in this thread, however, show that it's possible to sue auction houses successfully for selling forgeries? Might there then be a way, via multiple, similar suits against one auction house, or via one monster suit encompassing a whole pile of forgeries, to show a pattern that ultimately compels the house to divulge the consignors/forgers?

Actually, Karl, the original lawsuit was against AutographCentral (Bryan Slaven). AutographCentral isn't an auction house.

Bryan Slaven paid Chris Morales as an expert witness. In the end Bryan Slaven issued Mr. Lovert Bassett a full refund and paid Morales a hefty amount to testify on behalf of AutographCentral. That didn't work out too well.

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Actually, Karl, the original lawsuit was against AutographCentral (Bryan Slaven). AutographCentral isn't an auction house.

Bryan Slaven paid Chris Morales as an expert witness. In the end Bryan Slaven issued Mr. Lovert Bassett a full refund and paid Morales a hefty amount to testify on behalf of AutographCentral. That didn't work out too well.

Okay, but my point was that you apparently can successfully sue another party for selling you a forged autograph if you can reasonably prove it's a fake - and I'm guessing it wouldn't matter if the other party advised up front that you buy their autos at your own risk.

So what might happen if an individual or group buys 200 diverse autos from an outfit like Coach's Corner, sues them, refuses a refund but instead seeks some kind of damages, and proves 200 of 200 are fake. Might that open the door to further investigation of the company and its consignors? I'm assuming that once the consignors are divulged, and it turns out there are just 3 or 4 guys providing hundreds of fakes auction after auction, that it might mean game over?