• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

A $200K plus coin fraud on ebay

28 posts in this topic

This was inserted near the bottom of the ~long~ description for a 1883-S Morgan.

 

 

The poster sizes for the sale of this lot may vary,but approximately are two hundred ten millimeters on two hundred ninety seven millimeters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that the illiterate can afford such extravagant works of art. doh!

If you look at the original listings there's no way anyone would have read the full description to see that sentence tucked in there. The descriptions were generic overviews of the coin's history (for the series, not that specific coin). And after about 50 lines of boilerplate description, the sentence about the poster is snuck in. Not in a new paragraph, or highlighted in anyway, just put in at the almost end (but not the very end in case you did scroll down and skim the last block of text). This lister knew what he/she was doing and I do not blame any of the original bidders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that the illiterate can afford such extravagant works of art. doh!

If you look at the original listings there's no way anyone would have read the full description to see that sentence tucked in there. The descriptions were generic overviews of the coin's history (for the series, not that specific coin). And after about 50 lines of boilerplate description, the sentence about the poster is snuck in. Not in a new paragraph, or highlighted in anyway, just put in at the almost end (but not the very end in case you did scroll down and skim the last block of text). This lister knew what he/she was doing and I do not blame any of the original bidders.

 

+1

 

Fraud is fraud. And I consider that seller's actions to be fraudulent in the way that he buried the most pertinent information regarding the item for sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that the illiterate can afford such extravagant works of art. doh!

If you look at the original listings there's no way anyone would have read the full description to see that sentence tucked in there. The descriptions were generic overviews of the coin's history (for the series, not that specific coin). And after about 50 lines of boilerplate description, the sentence about the poster is snuck in. Not in a new paragraph, or highlighted in anyway, just put in at the almost end (but not the very end in case you did scroll down and skim the last block of text). This lister knew what he/she was doing and I do not blame any of the original bidders.

 

+1

 

Fraud is fraud. And I consider that seller's actions to be fraudulent in the way that he buried the most pertinent information regarding the item for sale.

 

 

Fraudulent? OK.

 

fraud·u·lent

Obtained, done by, or involving deception, especially criminal deception.

 

It would seem as though other more seasoned posters here were able to alter my perception of what is "fraudulent" and what is not. In another post I made back in August 2013 (somewhat similar in nature as it constituted 'fraudulent' behaviour as well), myself and some others, could see the fraudulent practices taking place by another eBay seller. However if I remember correctly, one would be surprised at just how many, and just who they were, that defended the person by saying that "well they aren't technically breaking any eBay rules or policies".

 

Actually they were, and once outlined and identified by me, those very same people were silent and I assume they just considered it part of the risk associated with eBay transactions.

 

So to that, I have been shown the light by those with far more ethical and legal wisdom than I.

 

Caveat Emptor !!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had heard of this before, a person selling pictures of an item. I could not remember where, but then it came to me. It was on Judge Judy, a show I never watch, must of been channel surfing. Judge really ripped the seller saying it was fraud, like this case will probably turn out......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had heard of this before, a person selling pictures of an item. I could not remember where, but then it came to me. It was on Judge Judy, a show I never watch, must of been channel surfing. Judge really ripped the seller saying it was fraud, like this case will probably turn out......

Yeah, this guy didn't invent this scam. I remember not too long ago when Sony's PlayStation 4 was released there was some guy in the news who got ripped off the same way...the seller just sent him a photo of the game system instead of the actual product.

 

It is worrisome though that the seller had something like 1700 positive feedback before pulling the scam. Either the seller was running the long con, or got desperate. I guess it's possible that the seller's eBay account could have got hijacked too. Who knows what happened. But I feel bad for the buyers. I'm sure they'll get their money back eventually. But it's a pain to have to deal with all that. Crappy thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was inserted near the bottom of the ~long~ description for a 1883-S Morgan.

 

The poster sizes for the sale of this lot may vary,but approximately are two hundred ten millimeters on two hundred ninety seven millimeters

 

 

Hard to believe that the illiterate can afford such extravagant works of art. doh!

 

 

 

Yes, but the seller listed the item in more than one category. One was in the poster category and another was in the coin category. Obviously the latter suggests that it would actually be a coin notwithstanding the text at the bottom, so I do think there was a misrepresentation of fact. One could have interpreted that to refer to images that could have come with the piece. I agree that it would have been best to inquire (as I would have done), but I still think it is more than an issue of reading the plain meaning of the text. I think it is arguably mail and wire fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an example:

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/034-United-States-1883-S-Morgan-034-lot-392-/381134832985?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=zxgELlwWBYe3kRkKkhgByQdIOqA%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

 

 

Listed in category:

Art>Art from Dealers & Resellers>Posters

Coins & Paper Money>Coins: US>Other

 

The seller then conveniently deleted some of the images that were hosted off of eBay from the listing and you will see the empty icon placeholder. The seller then proceeded with the monstrous "paragraph" being in small typeface:

 

Description

 

Photographs for your judgement....

 

The Morgan dollar was a United States dollar coin minted from 1878 to 1904, and then again in 1921. It was the first standard silver dollar minted since production of the previous design, the Seated Liberty dollar, ceased due to the passage of the Coinage Act of 1873, which also ended the free coining of silver. The coin is named for its designer, United States Mint Assistant Engraver George T. Morgan. The obverse depicts a profile portrait representing Liberty, while the reverse depicts an eagle with wings outstretched.The dollar was authorized by the Bland–Allison Act. Following the passage of the 1873 act, mining interests lobbied to restore free silver, which would require the Mint to accept all silver presented to it and return it, struck into coin. Instead, the Bland–Allison Act was passed,which required the Treasury to purchase between two and four million dollars' worth of silver at market value to be coined into dollars each month.In 1890, the Bland–Allison Act was repealed by the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, which required the Treasury to purchase 4,500,000 troy ounces(140,000 kg) of silver each month, but only required further silver dollar production for one year. This act, in turn, was repealed in 1893.In 1898, Congress approved a bill that required all remaining bullion purchased under the Sherman Silver Purchase Act to be coined into silver dollars.When those silver reserves were depleted in 1904, the Mint ceased to strike the Morgan dollar. The Pittman Act, passed in 1918, authorized the melting and recoining of millions of silver dollars. Pursuant to the act, Morgan dollars resumed mintage for one year in 1921. The design was replaced by the Peace dollar later the same year.In the early 1960s, a large quantity of uncirculated Morgan dollars was found to be available from Treasury vaults, including issues once thought rare. Individuals began purchasing large quantities of the pieces at face value, and eventually the Treasury ceased exchanging silver certificates for silver coin. Beginning in the 1970s, the Treasury conducted a sale of silver dollars minted at the Carson City Mint through the General Services Administration. In 2006, Morgan's reverse design was used on a silver dollar issued to commemorate the old San Francisco Mint building.In 1873, Congress enacted the Fourth Coinage Act,which effectively ended the bimetallic standard in the United States by demonetizing silver bullion. Prior to enactment of the Coinage Act, silver could be brought to the mints and coined into legal tender for a small fee.With such a system in place, bullion producers could have silver coined into dollars when the intrinsic value of a silver dollar was lower than the face value, thus making a profit, flooding the money supply and causing inflation.The act ended production of the standard silver dollar (then the Seated Liberty dollar, as designed by Christian Gobrecht) and provided for mintage of a silver trade dollar, which was intended to compete with Mexican dollars for use in the Orient.Under the act, bullion producers were allowed to bring bullion to the mints in order to be cast into bars or coined into the newly authorized trade dollars for a small fee.Trade dollars initially held legal tender status, but it was revoked in 1876 to prevent bullion producers from making a profit by coining silver into trade dollars when the value of the metal was low.The restrictions on free coinage laid out in the Coinage Act initially met little resistance from mining interests until the price of silver declined rapidly due to increased mining in the Western United States. Protests also came from bankers, manufacturers and farmers, who felt an increased money supply would have a positive impact. Groups were formed that demanded the free coinage of silver (or "Free Silver") in order to inflate the dollar following the Panic of 1873.Beginning in 1876, several bills were introduced in the House of Representatives in an effort to resume the free coinage of silver.One such bill introduced into the House by Democratic Representative Richard P. Bland of Missouri was passed in the fall of 1876. senator William B. Allison of Iowa added important amendments to the bill in the Senate. The House bill allowed Free Silver; one of Allison's amendments struck that provision.This same amendment allowed for the issuance of silver certificates for the first time in United States history.The bill was vetoed by President Rutherford B. Hayes.The president's veto was overridden on February 28, 1878.What came to be known as the Bland–Allison Act required that the Treasury purchase between two and four million dollars' worth of silver per month,to be coined into silver dollars at the former gold/silver value ratio of 16:1, meaning that one ounce of gold would be valued the same as sixteen ounces of silver. In 1876, Director of the Mint Henry Richard Linderman began efforts to redesign the nation's silver coins.Linderman contacted C.W. Fremantle, Deputy Master of the Royal Mint in London, requesting him to "find a first class die-sinker who would be willing to take the position of Assistant Engraver at the Mint at Philadelphia."In response to Linderman's request, Fremantle wrote "My inquiries as to an Assistant Engraver lead me very strongly to recommend for the post Mr. George Morgan, age 30, who has made himself a considerable name, but for whom there is not much opening at present in this country."An agreement was reached between Linderman and Morgan for the engraver to work at the Philadelphia Mint under Chief Engraver William Barber on a six-month trial basis.Morgan arrived in Philadelphia on October 9, 1876. His earliest pattern coins designed during his tenure at the Philadelphia Mint were intended for the half dollar.In 1876, Morgan enrolled as a student at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts to prepare to create a new Liberty head design.Morgan also obtained studies from nature of the bald eagle for preparation of the reverse design.For the representation of Liberty, Morgan sought to depict an American woman rather than the usual Greek–style figures.Morgan's friend, artist Thomas Eakins, suggested he use Anna Willess Williams of Philadelphia as a model.In total, Morgan had five sittings with Williams; he declared her profile to be the most perfect he had seen.On October 18, 1877, Linderman requested Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint James Pollock to "instruct Mr. Morgan to prepare without delay, dies for a silver dollar, the designs, inscriptions, and arrangement thereof to be the same as the enclosed impression for the Half Dollar and numbered '2' substituting the words 'one dollar' in place of 'half dollar'". Linderman also ordered Pollock to "instruct Mr. Barber to prepare a reverse die for a dollar with a representation of an eagle as well as the inscriptions required by law. He will select whichever of his Heads of Liberty he prefers for the obverse of the same." Linderman evidently preferred the designs of Morgan over those of the Chief Engraver; he wrote Pollock on February 21, 1878, "I have now to state for your information, that it is my intention, in the event of the silver bill now pending in Congress, becoming law, to request the approval by the Secretary of the Treasury, of the dies prepared by Mr. Morgan." Mintage of the Morgan dollar remained relatively steady until the passage of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act on July 14, 1890.[22] The act, authored by Ohio senator and former Treasury secretary John Sherman, forced the Treasury to increase the amount of silver purchased to 4,500,000 troy ounces (140,000 kg) each month.[23] Supporters of the act believed that an increase in the amount of silver purchased would result in inflation, helping to relieve the nation's farmers.[24] The act also received support from mining interests because such large purchases would cause the price of silver to rise and increase their profits.[24] Despite the fact that the purchase of silver was required by the act, it stated that the Mint must coin 2,000,000 silver dollars each month only until 1891.[25] Since the Treasury already had a surplus of silver dollars, mintages dropped sharply beginning in 1892.[22] Thus the scarcest coins in the series occur just after this date, with the rarest the 1895 Philadelphia issue, which has only been found as a proof mintage of 880 dollars.The silver that remained after mintage of the dollars was used to mint dimes, quarters and half dollars.Beginning early in 1893, a number of industrial firms, including the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad and the National Cordage Company went bankrupt.The resulting bank runs and failures became known as the Panic of 1893. In June of that year, President Grover Cleveland, who believed that the Panic was caused by the inflation generated by the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, called a special session of Congress in order to repeal it.The act was repealed on November 1, 1893.On June 13, 1898, Congress ordered the coining of all the remaining bullion purchased under the Sherman Silver Purchase Act into silver dollars.Silver dollar production rose again,until the bullion was exhausted in 1904, when it ceased.The German government began a propaganda campaign during World War I to discredit the United Kingdom's currency in India.The Germans convinced India citizens that British banknotes in that country could not be redeemed for silver. This led to a run on the British supply of silver. In response, United States Democratic senator Key Pittman of Nevada introduced legislation in 1918 that was intended to offer financial relief to the British government. The bill, passed on April 22, 1918, stated that"sales of silver bullion under authority of this act may be made for the purpose of conserving the existing stock of gold in the United States, of providing silver for subsidiary coinage and for commercial use, and of assisting foreign governments at war with the enemies of the United States".The Pittman Act authorized the U.S. to melt up to 350,000,000 silver dollars,and this commenced immediately after the Act's passage.The U.S. eventually melted a total of 270,232,722 silver dollars.Of that amount, 259,121,554 were sold to the United Kingdom at the cost of one dollar per troy ounce.The U.S. only minted the Morgan dollar again during 1921, the only year in which Morgan dollars were struck at the Denver mint.Since the Treasury had destroyed the obsolete Morgan dollar dies in 1910, Morgan had to create an entirely new master die.Another provision of the Pittman Act authorized the U.S. to mint a replacement coin for every silver dollar melted.During the same year, the Peace dollar was first issued to commemorate the end of World War I.The Peace dollar was supposedly minted to replace the Morgan dollar under the terms of the Pittman Act but without congressional authorization, despite the fact that the Act did not describe the coin design.The change in design was actually authorized under an 1890 act of Congress.More onformation can be found at; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_dollar Terms and Conditions of the Sale.By placing a bid on any lot offered by topq,inc., the bidder indicates acceptance of the following terms of sale; These conditions of sale constitute a binding agreement between the bidder and topq,inc. The following terms and conditions constitute the sole terms and conditions under whichtopq,inc will offer for sale and sell the services and/or prints,other property.We do not ship internationally.Paypal is the prefered method of payment. Please note that topq,inc reserves the right to reject a bid from the bidder who has had two unpaid item notification in the past three months and/or low feedback score.The poster sizes for the sale of this lot may vary,but approximately are two hundred ten millimeters on two hundred ninety seven millimeters.Topq,inc does not accepts no liability for any delay and/or failure in executing bids,or any errors contained in bids due to internet nature.Purchases must be paid in full within five days of the end of the auction.Sales tax will be chargedunless the item is being shipped out of state,or the buyer provides a current state exemption form.We combine multiple lots.

 

 

So:

 

1 - We have now deleted images than we can now infer lead people to believe that this was an actual coin.

2 - Even if also listed in a poster category, it was clearly listed in the coin category suggesting that the item was a coin. One could have construed the listing to include poster size images along with the coin.

3 - The only real mention of the dimensions were at the bottom of several lines of irrelevant and verbose prose in small print.

 

So yes, in my opinion, it is fraud. And if I were a victim, you can bet that I would contact my local FBI office. In my opinion, this is classic mail and wire fraud.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would seem as though other more seasoned posters here were able to alter my perception of what is "fraudulent" and what is not. In another post I made back in August 2013 (somewhat similar in nature as it constituted 'fraudulent' behaviour as well), myself and some others, could see the fraudulent practices taking place by another eBay seller. However if I remember correctly, one would be surprised at just how many, and just who they were, that defended the person by saying that "well they aren't technically breaking any eBay rules or policies".

 

 

I glanced at the thread that you linked. While I didn't read every post to it, my impression was that disagreement was not about whether the listing was dishonest, but whether there was anything that could realistically be done. In terms of what can actually be done, there is a difference between misrepresenting the subjective condition of an item and suggesting that it is an entirely different item all together. The latter is absolutely actionable and things can be done. The former are much more difficult to do anything about. Unfortunately, there is no universally accepted "one correct grading scale" and thus legally, it is harder to accomplish anything. I suppose if you were ripped for thousands of dollars on a coin in a basement slab, you could file a civil fraud or constructive fraud suit (fraud is both a civil tort and a crime) arguing that the use of grades on a holder suggests a precise meaning or condition despite there not being any universal scale. This is very expensive to do and attorneys don't work for free. So realistically, for the items you were discussing in the other thread, the only viable enforcement mechanism would be eBay, and eBay likely wouldn't care because it didn't violate their meager and inadequate regulations. That is why the posters (especially Mark Feld) were focusing on eBay policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ebay customers should exhaust the ebay/paypal resources before taking on the fraud elsewhere. I have contacted state AGs which are useful with big unresponsive companies. Sometimes they will say you have to hire your own lawyer. I had a $3500 fraud on a coin I "bought" through Coin World. The guy took the bank check and kept the coin. I tried every legal lever available, even went to his apartment in NJ to hunt him down, but he never surfaced. I worked through the local police department, got a judgment through a lawyer that cost $600 but because he is on SSI disability, he was judgment proof. I even contacted the SS with the judgment for $3500, that he was using that free taxpayer money and SS as a shield. Ultimately if someone wants to scam the system like this and paypal has released the $$$ into his account, he can run and hide. The FBI and postal inspectors have a lot of resources at their disposal but seem to be powerless with crooks who hide with a pile of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ebay customers should exhaust the ebay/paypal resources before taking on the fraud elsewhere. I have contacted state AGs which are useful with big unresponsive companies. Sometimes they will say you have to hire your own lawyer. I had a $3500 fraud on a coin I "bought" through Coin World. The guy took the bank check and kept the coin. I tried every legal lever available, even went to his apartment in NJ to hunt him down, but he never surfaced. I worked through the local police department, got a judgment through a lawyer that cost $600 but because he is on SSI disability, he was judgment proof. I even contacted the SS with the judgment for $3500, that he was using that free taxpayer money and SS as a shield. Ultimately if someone wants to scam the system like this and paypal has released the $$$ into his account, he can run and hide. The FBI and postal inspectors have a lot of resources at their disposal but seem to be powerless with crooks who hide with a pile of money.

 

That is because your claim was small in the grander scheme of things. If it turns out that his scheme has reached six figures, I think the authorities might be more prone to care. Far too often, the authorities will write off blatant fraud as purely a civil matter. Instead of suggesting that it is not within their purview, it would be more straightforward of them to say that "we don't have the resources to pursue the claim." That is the real answer. And they might very well do the same here, but given the dollar amounts and the number of fraudulent transactions, I think this will be different.

 

And I certainly hope that you obtained a judgment for fraud and not mere breach of contract. A fraud judgment can survive a bankruptcy. So he might not have any assets now, but as long as the judgment is still valid (some jurisdictions have an expiration on judgments, but there is usually a renewal process - don't miss that), there is some hope for you. Make sure that the judgment is reported on his credit report. The next time he wants to find a new apartment, buy a home, or buy a car, I think you might find some sense of justice in that you have made that very difficult for him. In some cases, it might be enough to pressure him into paying at least some of it back to you. Judgments typically stay on a credit report for seven years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the extent of tpqcollect's fraud, there were a lot more than the 50 or so transactions reported so far. Most of the coins sold for under market ("no Santa Claus in numismatics?) and his listings were pretty crappy except for the stolen images.

 

Here is a link to his transactions: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?rmvSB=true&_from=R40&_nkw=&_in_kw=1&_ex_kw=&_sacat=0&LH_Sold=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_samilow=&_samihi=&_sadis=15&_stpos=&_sargn=-1%26saslc%3D1&_salic=1&_fss=1&_fsradio=%26LH_SpecificSeller%3D1&_saslop=1&_sasl=tpqcollect&_sop=13&_dmd=1&_ipg=200&LH_Complete=1

 

He was probably getting fast access to the funds, so did not have to wait for the item to arrive to get the scam $$$. And the transactions window was narrow enough that he would maximize the stolen money without alerting the ebay/paypal police so they could swing quickly into action freezing or seizing his money. Plus what % of those scammed actually take action? So the negatives so far are just part of the picture.

 

Roughly January 15 was the last real auction with this item that sold for $15: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sweden-1932-2-Kronor-/201260328871?pt=Art_Prints&hash=item2edc0ce7a7&nma=true&si=UP0iVcR5VeOou4fmIJXgGvkGHd0%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

 

Every coin after that, presumably with the stolen images and "poster" aspect, was $200 plus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But PayPal and eBay seemingly have liability under their buyer guarantees for an object significantly as not described. I know what the counterarguments could be, but realistically, the total amount of fraud are only token amounts to a billion dollar company like eBay/PayPal. I would think their reputation would be more valuable to them.

 

Sadly your case illustrates nicely why I am very conservative with checks. I very rarely write them, and when I do, it is almost always to someone I have dealt with for more than a year. I would never write a check to a dealer that I had never had dealings with unless it was a member of PNG or a PCGS/NGC Authorized Dealer. My reasoning for the latter is that each of those organizations require certain financial conditions and capitalization requirements, meaning that those organizations are not, in fact, judgment proof. And a fraudulent conveyance suit could recover any transfers that were made to try to make such a company judgment proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was something similar on one of the TV "court" shows several years ago. A woman was selling photos of the items and not the real items, and the verbiage was misleading. Seller refused to refund $$ so plaintiff sued....an won, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was something similar on one of the TV "court" shows several years ago. A woman was selling photos of the items and not the real items, and the verbiage was misleading. Seller refused to refund $$ so plaintiff sued....an won, of course.

 

Suing and winning is half the battle. I have a couple judgments against individuals who I will never see a dime from and in the end only ended up costing more money by taking them to court. The system is rigged in the criminals favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kenny,

I absolutely understand your position, and it is much more logical than my own. I tend to look at issues such as this in more of a philosophical manner and, although I am not a Saint by any means (actually I had quite a colorful adolescent stage in my life, although nothing real bad), I am no different than you, Mark Feld, or anyone else that believes that their word and integrity are worth far more than any potential monetary gain.

 

For those reasons, trust me when I say I think what this person did is despicable and every bit large scale fraud. I hope they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and that the victims are able to recover partial, if not all, of their losses.

 

Your logical arguments are sound and my initial sarcasm in the above replies was no more than an attempt to look at the entire culture of fraudulent activity that takes place through a philosophical lens, and insist that any and all attempts at fraud are equal in my eyes, regardless of the amount involved or the level of subtlety used.

 

And to any that can't remember what that person was doing in 2013 (and possibly still doing), that in my eyes was fraudulent behavior, was trying to sell coins in holders that resembled the PCGS and NGC slabs in color and label layout, except as seen below, they were rearranging the letters in a manner as such to confuse those that might not be paying attention to details.

 

______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

ripoffebayguy.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the coin images taken from Heritage Auctions, isn't it astonishing that nobody among the many Heritage bidders recognized and reported even one of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was something similar on one of the TV "court" shows several years ago. A woman was selling photos of the items and not the real items, and the verbiage was misleading. Seller refused to refund $$ so plaintiff sued....an won, of course.

 

Suing and winning is half the battle. I have a couple judgments against individuals who I will never see a dime from and in the end only ended up costing more money by taking them to court. The system is rigged in the criminals favor.

 

Yep. Enforcement of judgment is something that a lot of people overlook. I call them turnips (i.e. "you cannot get blood out of a turnip") for judgment proof people. A good number of them are decent, but there is a tiny subset that knows that they are judgment proof and don't really care whether they cause damage to you or not. And then there is bankruptcy, which can clear most type of judgments (fraud is usually an exception as long as you properly object in the bankruptcy to any discharge).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the coin images taken from Heritage Auctions, isn't it astonishing that nobody among the many Heritage bidders recognized and reported even one of them?

 

Yes, I am a bit surprised too. You would have thought he would have been caught by a savvy bidder and reported to eBay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people see what they want to see.... the people who wanted a great deal on a great coin were likely not worried about the fact that his pics magicly became professional and amazing looking....

 

And the people who are active on Heritage were likely not spending too much time browsing this guys listings.... One of the first things I do though, especially when looking at buying from an ebay seller I haven't dealt with, is analyze this sellers photos.... again, though, people see what they want to see more than what can or should be seen....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make sure that the judgment is reported on his credit report. The next time he wants to find a new apartment, buy a home, or buy a car, I think you might find some sense of justice in that you have made that very difficult for him. In some cases, it might be enough to pressure him into paying at least some of it back to you.

But if he can pull down six figure incomes in two weeks with a single run of ebay scamms, he might not be too concerned about his credit report. Run a scam, wait a couple months, repeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make sure that the judgment is reported on his credit report. The next time he wants to find a new apartment, buy a home, or buy a car, I think you might find some sense of justice in that you have made that very difficult for him. In some cases, it might be enough to pressure him into paying at least some of it back to you.

But if he can pull down six figure incomes in two weeks with a single run of ebay scamms, he might not be too concerned about his credit report. Run a scam, wait a couple months, repeat.

 

Fair enough. That comment was geared more towards Nutmeg and his victimization in a $3,500 scam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be relatively easy for ebay to set the criteria for sellers higher, than permitting crooks to sell cheap stuff and then run a scam with images of stolen certified coins. That should have run a bunch of alarm bells with ebay as every seller I know of except for the really big ones have selling limits and must have substantial track records to sell $500-$1000 plus coins. They should demote incompetent people at ebay while instituting new controls to prevent this from happening in the future. It goes without saying that all those scammed should get their money back with proof of being scammed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update: word is that those defrauded are being refunded.

 

 

 

"I JUST RECEIVED A FULL REFUND!! Not sure if you need to initiate a case or not, but my purchsed item was taken off of my ebay, and as soon as i hit send on my resolution department query, i got an expedited refund notification. Hopefully the same good news for all!!"

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=936725&STARTPAGE=7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Nutmeg for keeping us informed, let's hope all those scammed receive full refunds, and will you please follow up with notifications of significant further developments, such as legal actions, arrests, prosecutions and penalties.

 

In the meantime, this has been an instructive scenario for anyone who bids on ebay or competing sites, to remember to carefully scrutinize all aspects of sales, especially with expensive items. Plus It might provide an additional layer of buyer protection to fund certain major purchases with a credit card instead of check or bank account via Paypal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites