What is Wrong With This Picture posted by hunter's gold

[CSJournals-migration]

A costly mistake avoided

 

Hi everyone. Within the last 4 months an NGC MS68RD 1964 Lincoln Memorial sold for $2000 and at the time the seller said it had a population of 1. Shortly thereafter, this example came up for sale and of course I was interested in adding this coin to my Lincoln Memorial Circulation sets. I check NGC Population Report and it did show a population of 2. The seller of this coin listed it several times on Ebay and would drop the price each time it did not sell and re-list it. As the price continued to drop I became more interested in the coin. I mentioned this coin to a seller that I have been dealing with and who is I believe on of the best on Ebay and he sent me a message back right after looking at the listing and told me it was not a MS68RD example of this coin but a PF68RD example of this coin and it had been labeled incorrectly by NGC. I am not sure if the seller of this coin knew that this coin was mislabeled but NGC did remove the listing and NGC did correct the population report. All I can say is that I dodged a bullet and a big thank you for someone looking out for me. As always, thanks for looking and Happy Collecting

 

See more journals by hunter's gold

[hunter's gold]

As I stated, I am not sure if the seller of this example knew that it was labeled incorrectly but the price of this coin went from around $2000 in M68RD to $25.00 in PF68RD when the correction was made.

[chunk-it]

I'm with you on this one. When it originally hit the market at $2000, I almost bought it. But even at the time the pop report said 2. I even told the seller trying to get him to drop the price alittle. I always thought that is was such a good clean strike, that's why it looked pl. But we both dodged a big bullet.

[chunk-it]

Plus, I also feel like someone should be held responsible for the mistake. Whether being ngc or the original owner knowing where it came from, just trying to make a big profit. If I bought it. NGC and i would be going to small claims court.

[hunter's gold]

I agree with you but I am not sure what NGC's responsibility would be. I wonder what their position would be in this case?

[Schatzy]

Looks like a proof from here!!

[BULLY]

Right or wrong, NGC makes its position on this issue abundantly clear in the NGC GUARANTEE found here:

 

http://www.ngccoin.com/services/writtenguarantee.asp

 

The pertinent portion is as follows, and comes under the header

WARNING: THIS GUARANTEE IS LIMITED.:

 

Clerical errors, mechanical errors and typos are NOT guaranteed. If requested, NGC will remedy any mechanical error with respect to the description or grade of a coin on its label, free of charge. It is the duty of the buyer and seller of an NGC-certified coin to examine coins for mechanical errors and to return such coins for correction when warranted. The determination of what constitutes a mechanical error is at the sole discretion of NGC; examples of mechanical errors include, but are not limited to, the following:

 

If a coin were labeled a 1955 Doubled Die Lincoln Cent, when, in fact, the coin has no doubling, this would be a clerical error in the labeling description of the coin and not covered by the NGC Coin Grading Guarantee.

 

If the coin label description references a 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter, when, in fact, the coin in the holder with said label were a 1916 Barber Quarter, the description would be the result of a clerical error. Once again, this would not be covered by the NGC Coin Grading Guarantee.

 

If a coin were identified as a Proof, when, in fact, it is a business strike and the types are readily distinguishable from each other, this again would be a clerical error and not be covered by the NGC Coin Grading Guarantee.

 

If a coin were described as an 1881-O Morgan Dollar, when, in fact, it is an 1881-S Morgan Dollar and the mintmark were improperly identified on the label, this would constitute a clerical error, not covered by NGC's guarantee.

 

 

 

[hunter's gold]

Thanks Bully for the info. That cleared things up for me.

[copper toning]

I would be willing to bet if it were pushed this could be settled. Probably either out of court for pr if nothing else. Some who did not know better actually may not have realized this was a proof. With all the proof and proof like designations there are grounds for confusion and the professionals could easily be seen liable. Could you imagine the ignorance of a jury? Who's side would they likely be on?

 

How ever given the seller relisted for $28 I am sure they knew. Otherwise there would be a major stink. I would be surprised if ngc does not purchase this coin.

[hunter's gold]

The seller did not drop the price on this coin. That is what it would be worth as a proof. Ebay pulled this listing after it was brought to their attention and NGC corrected their population report after being notified of this coin.

[copper toning]

Sorry I misunderstood. I think I smell some thing.