What's my best option now?

[JIM F.]

First mistake was buying this

http://Support-the-Collectors-Society.com/itm/290605670916?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

 

Second mistake was not seeing that would charge 15% restocking fee if returned. I'm not sure how I missed this, but apparently I did.

 

So at the price I'm in at, am I better to keep it or return it?

 

The seller is pretty much being a jerk about it, I told him his pics were not very good and deceptive -- his response.

 

"No problem. This is why I started charging the restocking fee of now 15%. 10% wasn't enough to deter people from using me as a preview service. Also, picture comment is BS. One can clearly see on the reverse that in has no chance of getting the cameo designation from PCGS or NGC. All you had to do was ask me"

 

Keep it or return it?

 

 

[ldhair]

To me the sellers terms are not fair but he did have them posted. In the listing he says it would probably up grade but nothing about the cameo designation. Now he says it's your fault for not asking. Not a dealer I would care to deal with.

 

You could file with Paypal and probably get everything back. I would tell the seller that I'm not at all happy with the deal and stop short of saying anything about feedback. If I thought the coin could get in a graded holder with PCGS or NGC, at any grade, I would keep it and neg the seller for being such a jerk.

[Dcoin]

To me the sellers terms are not fair but he did have them posted. In the listing he says it would probably up grade but nothing about the cameo designation. Now he says it's your fault for not asking. Not a dealer I would care to deal with.

 

You could file with Paypal and probably get everything back. I would tell the seller that I'm not at all happy with the deal and stop short of saying anything about feedback. If I thought the coin could get in a graded holder with PCGS or NGC, at any grade, I would keep it and neg the seller for being such a jerk.

 

He may be taking a hard line but I do not think he is acting like a "jerk". His auction, his rules.

[BillJones]

You link did not lead to an item on my computer so I have no idea what you purchased. What it comes down to is the item worth to you the 85% of the purchase price that you will get back? If it is then keep it. If not, return it.

 

And you have also learned that this seller belongs on your "never again" list. Sometimes that is worth the 15% of the purchase price so that you won't get stuck on something that is more expensive.

[Hard Times]

Hard to tell because your link does not take one to the listing.

[ajaxfarrell]

YOUR LINK isn't working.

 

What did you buy ?

[johnny9434]

that does not look like a very good website. what did you get there and where is there return policy? just wondering

[cpm9ball]

I'm wondering if he would need permission from NGC before using..........

 

"Welcome to support-collectors-society.com"

 

Chris

[comicdonna]

First mistake was buying this

http://Support-the-Collectors-Society.com/itm/290605670916?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

 

Second mistake was not seeing that would charge 15% restocking fee if returned. I'm not sure how I missed this, but apparently I did.

 

So at the price I'm in at, am I better to keep it or return it?

 

The seller is pretty much being a jerk about it, I told him his pics were not very good and deceptive -- his response.

 

"No problem. This is why I started charging the restocking fee of now 15%. 10% wasn't enough to deter people from using me as a preview service. Also, picture comment is BS. One can clearly see on the reverse that in has no chance of getting the cameo designation from PCGS or NGC. All you had to do was ask me"

 

Keep it or return it?

 

I see two things wrong with this auction. I believe it was misleading for the seller to imply the coin would grade higher if submitted. Especially, since he supplied poor images.

 

I feel that the seller should have made it more clear, that he charges a 15% restocking fee. From a buyers prospective, I did not notice this. After knowing it existed, I had a hard time locating it.

 

Based on these two things, I would not keep the coin, nor would I be willing to pay the 15% restocking fee. I would send him an e-mail explaining my feelings. If he insisted on charging a restocking fee, I would let him know that he has left you with no choice but to give him negative feedback. It's my feeling, he will change his mind. If not, you still have recourse by opening up a dispute.

 

 

[comicdonna]

that does not look like a very good website. what did you get there and where is there return policy? just wondering

He's referring to the same 1950 Proof Franklin. He felt the need to start another thread.

[BillJones]

Without seeing the coin or a photo, the only advise I can give about 1950 Proof Franklin half dollars is that they come somewhat dull, not bright like most Proofs. Eye appeal is often an issue with these coins. The piece he sent you MIGHT be okay for the issue. You can't expect as much from an "average" 1950 Proof Franklin half as you might from one of the later dates.

[comicdonna]

Here's a link to the coin.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/290605670916?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

[bsshog40]

Well from what I'm reading in the description, " The proof coin has frosted cameo features." this would be telling me that the coin, in the sellers mind, would upgrade. He has the coin in-hand and everyone knows that pics are not always an indication of the coin in-hand. If it were me and the coin showed up not being even close to what you thought you were purchasing, I'd return it. The re-stocking charges will probably not be an issue if you have to file a dispute with Ebay. I actually ran into this a while bac on a piece of spoon pool vacuum. The seller wanted to charge me a 15% restock fee and I wound up filing a dispute with Ebay because this thing did not even come close to working as they described. Ebay had the seller pay for return shipping and also give me a 100% refund. I don't like filing disputes but when you get a seller that likes to word things to his advantage instead of being honest with potential buyers, it has to be done.

[BillJones]

There are several issues with this.

 

First, a really nice Cameo Proof 1950 Franklin half dollar is worth well over $2,000. The pictures are not good enough to decide what the grade of this coin really is. They show the cameo on the obverse, but the reverse photo is so poor that you can’t tell if it’s a cameo or not. I suspect that it is not a cameo.

 

At the same time what I can see looks better than PR-63, but only a guess. PCI, a third world grading company, called it “Cameo” based on the obverse, it seems. What you have is a $2,000+ obverse and a $300 reverse. I would not say that the seller ripped you off, but you are not going to get the crossover you want either. The PCGS price guide says that a PR-63, Cam is worth $500, but I think you would be unhappy with the eye appeal for a coin graded like that.

 

So you can decide if the great looking obverse is worth it to you.

 

[Buffalo Head]

First off this is a PCI graded coin and I for one have found these PCI coins to be over graded at least this has been my experience. Second is I don't understand where the 15% comes in? Why do sellers charge 15% to except a return? I feel any seller that charges 15% return fees is a seller I won't deal with. This means if I don't like the coin it's going to cost me, no good.... I would stay away. I hope this works out for you and at the least chalk it up as what kind of seller to stay away from. 15% good lord.....Joe

[BillJones]

First off this is a PCI graded coin and I for one have found these PCI coins to be over graded at least this has been my experience.

 

The "old" PCI graded coins could be about anything. There are a lot of stories about people crossing PCI coins into PCGS holders at higher grades, and I believe them. The company was very inconsistent. Then the brand name was bought out by a succession of owners who took the company name to the pits.

 

In this case it’s like they have lowered the grade below what it really is, but then gave it the “Proof Cameo” designation to a coin which has only one Cameo side. That’s not market acceptable, but I’ll tell you this. I’ve seen the same thing on “big name” holders that had a nice cameo on the obverse and only a hint of a cameo on the reverse. So in this case PCI may not have strayed that far from the norm.

 

[jom]

Interesting that the 15% restocking fee is buried in the listing...I'm gonna have to remember to look for that.

 

jom

[jerseycat10]

To play Devils Advocate...

 

#1) Caveat Emptor

#2) I think 15% restocking is a valid seller protection against people kicking tires.

 

Regardless of whether the dealer is a little arrogant or brash, I see no reason that he deserves negative feedback.

[JIM F.]

No one has addressed my question....should I just keep it?

 

I did some research and Ebay condones restocking fees, so unlikely I can get that removed.

[lcoopie]

"There is a 15% restocking fee for all returns, unless there was an error on my part."

 

 

he called it a

"Rare 1950 Silver Franklin Half Dollar Proof Cameo BU"

 

calling it a cameo seems like an error to me

 

I would not keep it.

 

 

[jerseycat10]

It was a CAMEO according to PCI.

 

The seller has done no wrong here, IMO.

 

The seller made no claims that the coin would cross with the CAMEO designation.

 

You have every right to return the coin, but no right to challenge the 15% restocking fee.

[Buffalo Head]

Well from what I'm reading in the description, " The proof coin has frosted cameo features." this would be telling me that the coin, in the sellers mind, would upgrade. He has the coin in-hand and everyone knows that pics are not always an indication of the coin in-hand. If it were me and the coin showed up not being even close to what you thought you were purchasing, I'd return it. The re-stocking charges will probably not be an issue if you have to file a dispute with Ebay. I actually ran into this a while bac on a piece of spoon pool vacuum. The seller wanted to charge me a 15% restock fee and I wound up filing a dispute with Ebay because this thing did not even come close to working as they described. Ebay had the seller pay for return shipping and also give me a 100% refund. I don't like filing disputes but when you get a seller that likes to word things to his advantage instead of being honest with potential buyers, it has to be done.

 

Well said and I agree with Bobby. If there is a problem with his, the sellers, discription all bets are off and the buyer should get a FULL refund. And to answer your question, if the coin does NOT match the sellers discription and your not happy with the coin, then send it back.....Joe

[noow]

Threaten to file a claim or leave negative feedback. That usually works.

[MarkFeld]

Threaten to file a claim or leave negative feedback. That usually works.

Threatening negative feedback is against EBay rules and could cause problems for the buyer.

[coinman_23885]

First mistake was buying this

http://Support-the-Collectors-Society.com/itm/290605670916?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

 

Second mistake was not seeing that would charge 15% restocking fee if returned. I'm not sure how I missed this, but apparently I did.

 

So at the price I'm in at, am I better to keep it or return it?

 

The seller is pretty much being a jerk about it, I told him his pics were not very good and deceptive -- his response.

 

"No problem. This is why I started charging the restocking fee of now 15%. 10% wasn't enough to deter people from using me as a preview service. Also, picture comment is BS. One can clearly see on the reverse that in has no chance of getting the cameo designation from PCGS or NGC. All you had to do was ask me"

 

Keep it or return it?

 

I would certainly return it. If you are unhappy with the coin now, you will certainly be disenchanted with it later, and you might as well free up the funds for other coins. With regards to the stocking fee, you should know that if the images are not representative of the coin, you could force the seller's hand via a Paypal dispute. Paypal will likely override the 15% restocking fee. While I have never addressed this situation in a restocking fee context, I did purchase a high grade shield nickel from a seller in an old ANACS holder without a return privilege. The images made the coin look immaculate and the strike seemed fine. When I received the coin, the strike was so shallow on the "5" that it almost completely disappeared at certain angles. This was not evident in the photos online. Given the fraudulent and misleading nature of the seller's photos, I forced the seller's hand in taking the coin back for a full refund.

 

 

[e1cnr]

I would return it (unless you really want it - probably $150 over valued)

 

Checking the sellers buying and selling history, they would know how to maximize their value in this coin - and keeping in PCI must be it.

 

they state ->Description: This is a rare 1950 Silver Franklin Half Dollar Proof housed in a sealed plastic holder. The proof coin has frosted cameo features. Before 10 people "message" me and ask if it will go a grade higher if resubmitted, my answer is probably.

 

?Probably unless to NGC or PCGS?

 

if they do not return 100%, then file a PAYPAL claim -

 

make sure you use PAYPAL shipping with tracking/insurance to return if you can

[Mark T]

I would consider filing a claim against the restocking fee. His comment that the coin will probably upgrade is most likely a violation of some EBAY rule. You overpaid for the coin , retail for PR 63 Cameo is $500. What were you thinking paying $550 ??

[JIM F.]

I paid $440. Don't know why the link shows more than this.

 

 

[e1cnr]

if you pd $440, than not as bad as I thought

 

what has me worried is the PCI PR63 grade

 

check that guy close for problems or hairlines all over the fields

I usually discount PCI a couple pts compared to PCGS or NGC,

until my viewing convinces me otherwise

 

Do you want this in a NGC slab for registry, or just a raw collection?

[JIM F.]

The intent was registry as a "place holder". The only problem I can find is the "tick" next to the nose on obverse.