POLL: Who is responsible to reimburse collectors for bad autographs

[David Atkatz]

You might as well ask "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Both the auction houses and the TPAs have legally indemnified themselves. Read the small print in the auction catalogs and the TPAs contracts. According to them--and who has the money to test whether it can hold up in court?--neither of them will take financial responsibility.

[drc]

I believe 7. Angels that is.

[packs]

I know JSA/PSA only offer opinions, but they are industry accepted opinions. To me, if I buy an item from a seller and the item is found not to be authentic then I would expect not only a full refund on the auction price, but a refund on the authentication price as well. This would only be if the seller "guaranteed" authenticity. If a seller isn't sure and states as much, as long as they are willing to refund the auction price I am satisfied.

[barrysloate]

I still have a problem with the dealer being fully responsible for restitution. Sure, if it's a $300 item and it turns out to be bad, write a check and move on. It's a writeoff and just good business.

But let's say it's a 100K item, and it's something you wouldn't normally handle, but because it had a LOA from a reputable third party, you had a sufficient level of comfort. Then five years later, you get a call from the person you sold it to who says he knows it's bad and he wants his 100K back. And you don't have that kind of money (most dealers don't), you can't get any satisfaction from the authenticator, you sold it in good faith, and you might have to refinance your house or go belly up to reimburse him.

And what if that 100K item was an auction consignment, and the auctioneer goes back to the consignor who refuses under any circumstances to return all the money. Should everybody be whole except the dealer who will be out 100K? I think this is a complicated matter.