I apparently sold a mislabeled coin for too much money..

[MarkFeld]

Recently, I sold a coin, which had been consigned to me.

 

It had been graded/attributed by a highly respected third party grading company.

 

It was labeled as an over-date, which, based on its assigned grade, made it worth roughly $500 more than a non over-date - using ballpark/round numbers, approximately $2500 instead of $2000.

 

The would-be buyer emailed me upon receipt of the coin and indicated that he liked it, but that he thought it was mislabeled as an over-date.

 

I prefer not to mention the grading company or the specific coin, so as not to potentially interfere with a resolution between the grading company and the coin's owner.

 

I contacted my consignor, who had bought it from another party. He looked at the coin's image and is of the opinion that the coin was indeed, mislabeled.

 

The coin is going to be returned to my consignor, who will contact the grading company, to get the error corrected. He should/will hopefully be compensated for the error.

 

I am posting this because I think it might serve as a good lesson for others.

 

My consignor was lazy and/or too accepting of the coin's attribution, to check it out.

 

I was equally lazy and/or too accepting of the coin's attribution, to check it out.

 

Fortunately, my client was neither of those things. And he was a true gentleman, especially under the circumstances.

 

I was going to make $100 on the sale of the coin, so it's not like I'll be losing out on a large profit. But, I think it reflects poorly on me, that I sold the coin, without checking it out properly.

 

I apologize to my client, who is, of course, welcome to post to the thread if he wishes.

 

And, at the same time, I am thankful for the (hopefully inexpensive) lesson.

[EVillageProwler]

Mark,

 

Is the consignor one whose opinion you can generally trust, and whose professional reputation generally positive?

 

EVP

[MarkFeld]

Mark,

 

Is the consignor one whose opinion you can generally trust, and whose professional reputation generally positive?

 

EVP

 

Steve, I believe that I can trust his opinion. He is not well enough known in the industry to have a widespread reputation at this point.

 

However, between the opinion of the would-be buyer and the consignor, I am confident, though not certain, that the coin was mislabeled. I will report back, if/when I hear more, after the coin is re-examined by the grading company.

[EVillageProwler]

Thanks Mark.

 

What I'm really asking is if the consignor knew it was a mis-label and wanted to profit from it at your expense?

 

EVP

[MarkFeld]

Thanks Mark.

 

What I'm really asking is if the consignor knew it was a mis-label and wanted to profit from it at your expense?

 

EVP

 

Steve, based upon my interactions and dealings with him over a period of time, I firmly believe that the consignor did not know. Thanks.

[EVillageProwler]

In that case, it's just an honest mistake with, perhaps as you put it, a touch of laziness.

 

EVP

[MarkFeld]

In that case, it's just an honest mistake with, perhaps as you put it, a touch of laziness.

 

EVP

 

Agreed. Though I feel more responsible, since he sold to me/a dealer, whereas I sold to a collector. I believe that my responsibility was greater.

[gmarguli]

In that case, it's just an honest mistake with, perhaps as you put it, a touch of laziness.

 

EVP

 

Agreed. Though I feel more responsible, since he sold to me/a dealer, whereas I sold to a collector. I believe that my responsibility was greater.

 

First you said it was consigned to you and now you say it was sold to you. Big difference to me. If consigned to you, it goes back to the consignor for them to fix it. If sold to you, as a dealer, you eat the mistake. And I know that wasn't your question/what you were looking for, but I thought I'd point it out.

 

Either way, I don't feel it was a big oversight to not check the coin to make sure the label info was correct.

[WoodenJefferson]

If I understand correctly, this was not considered a 'clerical error' as being mislabeled, but wasn't the coin in question sent in for a specific attribution and why does the dealer/collector need to second guess the service that was paid for?

 

Yet another lean towards CAC?

[James_OldeTowne]

If you can provide slightly more detail, I'd be interested to learn whether it was attributed by die-marriage? Redbook variety? etc. because some overdates are easy to miss.

[newprepper]

So let me get this straight, you sold a coin as x, now you believe it is actually Y, and worth less. Was it sent to the TPG to be checked as X, or as a generic and they labeled it X. If so how can it be your laziness. Are you now supposed to examine every coin in your inventory to be sure that all is correct including whether it is authentic. If we all agree that the TPG's are where it's at, then we need to be putting the blame and responsibilities on them. From where I sit, nobody who had the coin is due any blame for this mistake. Except the people putting their name on it. If I'm not mistaken overdates are pretty difficult to see and some of the photos I've seen amaze me that somebody could tell.

 

It shows me that you are a moral and ethical dealer that you are willing to make right what I don't feel is your responsibility Mark. Somebody down the road will get $ from the TPG under the guarantee, how far back does that go?

[coinman_23885]

If I understand correctly, this was not considered a 'clerical error' as being mislabeled, but wasn't the coin in question sent in for a specific attribution and why does the dealer/collector need to second guess the service that was paid for?

 

If the coin is in a NGC holder (which I do not know whether it is or not), then NGC's guarantee does not cover variety attribution. The collector/dealer would seemingly be out of luck. This is one of the few areas where I feel the PCGS guarantee is stronger (if they actually honor it and don't play the "clerical error" game). Does anyone know whether CAC verifies the attributions of the coins it stickers?

[MarkFeld]

In that case, it's just an honest mistake with, perhaps as you put it, a touch of laziness.

 

EVP

 

Agreed. Though I feel more responsible, since he sold to me/a dealer, whereas I sold to a collector. I believe that my responsibility was greater.

 

First you said it was consigned to you and now you say it was sold to you. Big difference to me. If consigned to you, it goes back to the consignor for them to fix it. If sold to you, as a dealer, you eat the mistake. And I know that wasn't your question/what you were looking for, but I thought I'd point it out.

 

Either way, I don't feel it was a big oversight to not check the coin to make sure the label info was correct.

 

Sorry, yes, it was consigned to me. And thanks for going easy on me.

[MarkFeld]

If I understand correctly, this was not considered a 'clerical error' as being mislabeled, but wasn't the coin in question sent in for a specific attribution and why does the dealer/collector need to second guess the service that was paid for?

 

Yet another lean towards CAC?

 

I have no idea whether the coin was originally submitted for a particular attribution or if the grading company made that determination on their own. Regardless, it needs to be second-guessed, because it looks to be incorrect.

 

I don't know if CAC would have caught it or not. But hopefully, they would have.

[MarkFeld]

So let me get this straight, you sold a coin as x, now you believe it is actually Y, and worth less. Was it sent to the TPG to be checked as X, or as a generic and they labeled it X. If so how can it be your laziness. Are you now supposed to examine every coin in your inventory to be sure that all is correct including whether it is authentic. If we all agree that the TPG's are where it's at, then we need to be putting the blame and responsibilities on them. From where I sit, nobody who had the coin is due any blame for this mistake. Except the people putting their name on it. If I'm not mistaken overdates are pretty difficult to see and some of the photos I've seen amaze me that somebody could tell.

 

It shows me that you are a moral and ethical dealer that you are willing to make right what I don't feel is your responsibility Mark. Somebody down the road will get $ from the TPG under the guarantee, how far back does that go?

 

I don't know the circumstances/particulars regarding the original submission of the coin for grading. Presumably, neither does the person who consigned it to me.

 

I think the TPG is ultimately responsible. But I think the seller of a coin, especially a dealer, also bears some responsibility to do some checking, if practical.

 

Thanks for your kind words.

[RWB]

Mistakes happen. Correct it and move on.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I would order a hairshirt, I'm not sure where there are available in this day and age, and wear it to feel the full gravity of the situation...

 

Seriously, the main commercial lapses in this field that merit concern for dealers, are those where the grading services have not rendered a verdict, accepting a great deal of responsibility by doing so and charging for it, and then the dealer states that a coin is a good coin without serious mentionable problems even though the coin is uncertified and has problems.

 

PCGS has a useful statistics page that has this statistic;

 

Warranty Claims - Last 30 days Warranty Claims - Last 12 months

Number Value Number Value

22 $63,603.00 1,622 $559,974.

 

I'm not sure exactly which coins have been the subject of this, but I'd like to see how the process works.

[Conder101]

This is why I keep saying that you MUST verify the attributions given by the TPG's. They make way too many attribution errors.

 

Was it sent to the TPG to be checked as X, or as a generic and they labeled it X. If so how can it be your laziness. Are you now supposed to examine every coin in your inventory to be sure that all is correct including whether it is authentic.

YES.

 

 

Sold on ebay as a nice XF example of a 220 year old Conder tokens, and as you can see, certified by one of the top four TPG's It is actually a common modern fake made in the 1950's

[WoodenJefferson]

Exactly why Fred Weinberg (independent error coin dealer) is contracted by PCGS to certify unique errors.

[Kurtdog]

My consignor was lazy and/or too accepting of the coin's attribution, to check it out.

 

I was equally lazy and/or too accepting of the coin's attribution, to check it out.

 

Fortunately, my client was neither of those things. And he was a true gentleman, especially under the circumstances.

As he's the only one among you who stood to lose money in the deal it's hardly surprising to me he's the only one among you who caught it.

[Conder101]

Each of them could have been the person who lost money on the deal.

 

If the guy James sold it to hadn't caught it then whenever he went to sell it he might have had to stand the loss. Until James sold it he was the one holding the bag and still would be now if he couldn't return it to who he bought it from. Currently the guy James bought it from is the the guy standing to take the loss if he can't send it further back up the line. At some point it won't be able to be pushed back up the line and that guy will be the one who loses the money because he didn't verify the attribution.

 

Anyone who buys something runs the risk of being the guy left holding the bag. So everyone should take due diligence and actually verify what you are buying is really what it is represent as.

[bochiman]

I would order a hairshirt, I'm not sure where there are available in this day and age, and wear it to feel the full gravity of the situation...

 

Seriously, the main commercial lapses in this field that merit concern for dealers, are those where the grading services have not rendered a verdict, accepting a great deal of responsibility by doing so and charging for it, and then the dealer states that a coin is a good coin without serious mentionable problems even though the coin is uncertified and has problems.

 

PCGS has a useful statistics page that has this statistic;

 

Warranty Claims - Last 30 days Warranty Claims - Last 12 months

Number Value Number Value

22 $63,603.00 1,622 $559,974.

 

I'm not sure exactly which coins have been the subject of this, but I'd like to see how the process works.

 

 

I have been through that process, about 8 years ago or so.

Bought, off ebay, a PR69DCAM 1968 Kennedy Half. Got the coin in-hand and there was an ugly milkspotting happening. This was back in the wilder days of ebay and not on paypal.

 

I ended up contacting PCGS for the guarantee (I think Russ may have suggested it to me when I talked to him) and, while it took MONTHS to get it done, I ended up being offered a fair value (they took the price offered from their valuation of a replacement coin) which was less than I paid.

 

So, I still have that coin, raw, as a reminder, and I was able to use the payout to go back to ebay and purchase a nice replacement that has not had a problem.

 

The PCGS warranty is obviously for more issues than just what I posted, but that was how the process worked back then (issue with coin/grade (non-mechanical issue), contact them, send in for review, wait a long time for reply, get an offer, accept or negotiate offer, get paid, move on.

[e1cnr]

I have gone through the warranty/review process from a couple 'top' TPGs without any success. My conclusion is the review process is generally a moneymaking generator for them. The only time they pay, is when the coin clearly turned in the holder to the point of dropping a few points.. otherwise it is still close enough for them or an obvious mechanical error.

 

I have learned that if I am paying any major 'premium' for a special variety or type, I want to see it before I pay for it. I passed on bidding higher a couple days ago on a 39 proof of 40 reverse nickel because I think ANACS got the label wrong.

 

Even if the seller has a return option, there is a risk in purchase -costs/mailing/returning/getting refund... and the time taken while money is tied up. Of course a 20% premium is much different than a 400% premium.

[mkman123]

Mark are you ok posting the coin for us to see?

 

I wonder whose fault it would be if the coin had a cac sticker...go after the tpg or cac? Imagine a 1942/1 merc with cac and its not a 42/1!

[mkman123]

Oops double post

[bochiman]

Mark are you ok posting the coin for us to see?

 

I wonder whose fault it would be if the coin had a cac sticker...go after the tpg or cac? Imagine a 1942/1 merc with cac and its not a 42/1!

 

What would CAC's warranty be at that stage? The grade of the coin?

The TPGS would call it "mechanical error" (ie....mislabel) and no warranty from that angle, most likely.

 

Not a fun situation for anyone to be in

[MarkFeld]

Mark are you ok posting the coin for us to see?

 

I wonder whose fault it would be if the coin had a cac sticker...go after the tpg or cac? Imagine a 1942/1 merc with cac and its not a 42/1!

 

Sorry, no, as the owner will be taking the situation up with the grading company.

 

In your hypothetical, presumably, both CAC and the grading company would both bear responsibility.

[coinman1794]

If I understand correctly, this was not considered a 'clerical error' as being mislabeled, but wasn't the coin in question sent in for a specific attribution and why does the dealer/collector need to second guess the service that was paid for?

 

If the coin is in a NGC holder (which I do not know whether it is or not), then NGC's guarantee does not cover variety attribution. The collector/dealer would seemingly be out of luck. This is one of the few areas where I feel the PCGS guarantee is stronger (if they actually honor it and don't play the "clerical error" game). Does anyone know whether CAC verifies the attributions of the coins it stickers?

 

I'm not sure that they do. They do not recognize most variety coins (only major overdates, Doubled Dies, etc), listing only a date and mint for most other varieties that PCGS and NGC list.

[Conder101]

wonder whose fault it would be if the coin had a cac sticker...go after the tpg or cac? Imagine a 1942/1 merc with cac and its not a 42/1!

I would think that CAC would not be liable. The CAC endorsement is their opinion of the grade, I don't see it as being an approval of attribution.

 

Reading over the CAC website all they discuss is the quality of the grading no other comments. Their explanation of what the sticker means states that it has been verified as to the quality of the grade, and that that verification is guaranteed. I can't find a link on their website to any written guarantee.

 

I would think that Bochiman is right. The grade is right so CAC is off the hook, and the TPG is off the hook because they have a clause in the guarantee that if it is an obvious error then it is a mechanical error (It obviously ISN'T a 42/1, you can clearly see it isn't.)