Giving Credit Where Credit is Due – Thanks NGC & Rick Montgomery

[gmarguli]

If I have a complaint, I’m never one to hold back stating something is wrong. At the same time, I feel it is important to point out when something happens that I think is nice and a company does right by the customer.

 

Recently I submitted some coins to NGC. These were some coins I’ve held back over the years waiting until either PCGS or NGC started to designate PL (Prooflike) or DPL (Deep Prooflike). I submitted 8 coins which I felt should get the PL or DPL designation. When I got the results, a grand total of 1 coin made the PL designation.

 

After I received the coins back in the mail and re-examined them to confirm my personal belief that they should have gotten the PL designation, I contacted Rick Montgomery. Late last week I sent 4 of the coins back to have him examine them. Today I got a phone call and email from Rick informing me that he and NGC had reviewed the coins and made a determination.

 

Now these aren’t expensive coins I submitted. In fact, they are downright cheap coins possibly likely not even worth the submission fees. I just submitted them to see if they could make the PL designation and get a better understanding of what it takes to make the PL designation at NGC..

 

It’s very nice that NGC takes the time to “get it right” with the customers. I could have easily been told to resubmit the coins and pay the appropriate fees or I could have been told the standard line that there were evaluated for the PL designation when the coins were graded, but I wasn't! NGC & Rick took the time to examine the coins and best of all, give me feedback as to why certain coins didn’t make the designation.

 

Thanks again to NGC for being #1 in customer service and Rick Montgomery for taking the time to examine these coins for me.

 

And for those interested, of the 4 coins I sent for review, 1 made the PL designation, 1 was awarded a * designation as they felt while the coin was PL, it was not PL enough to get the PL designation, yet it was special. The other two coins, while prooflike in appearance, “the effect is more attributable to the states of the dies that struck them rather than having a smooth, PL finish.” Now I know what won't make PL even if it is PL. That will save me a lot of headaches.

 

[DonHeath]

While it's on my mind, I'd like to take a minute to say thanks to the unknown employee that handled my invoice today too. I used an NCS coupon for free review and an NGC grading coupon for the same submission. I forgot you can't use two coupons on the same invoice, and since the grading invoice was marked earlybird I expected to pay $28 per coin for the group. Without my intervention they mailed back my grading coupon and reduced the submission to the least expensive tier. The entire process (review and grading) took only 20 days. It just can't be done much better than that. Just a note to say thanks, and good service doesn't go unnoticed.

[Dog97]

“the effect is more attributable to the states of the dies that struck them rather than having a smooth, PL finish.” is an interesting statement, gmarguli.

Can you comment on how the die state affected the surfaces of these coins & what type of coins they are?

[K6AZ]

Greg, what were the coins?

 

By the way, I have been very pleased with NGC's customer service. In the last four months, I have submitted 232 coins to NGC, and a grand total of 3 to PCGS.

[gmarguli]

The coins I sent in for review were a 1994-D World Cup $1, a 1982-D Washington 50¢, and (2) 1954-D Roosevelt 10¢. The other (3) coins I didn't send in for review, but I thought were PL were also 1954-D Roosevelts.

 

The World Cup dollar was awarded the PL designation. This coin was actually mis-slabbed by the competition as a proof. It is that PL.

 

The Washington 50¢ was awarded the * (Star) designation. While I personally thought it had full PL surfaces, NGC did not. Still, I'm happy it got a * and it is an interesting looking coin with the flashy surfaces.

 

The Roosevelt dimes were the kicker for me. They had, IMO, full PL surfaces. However, according to Rick, a coin cannot be PL as the result of a heavily polished die. The surfaces of the coin must be smooth and not full of heavy die polish lines. These coins were fairly well covered in heavy die polish lines. Had it not been for Rick taking the time to examine the coins and explain the requirements, I'd have been lost as to why they didn't get the PL designation.

 

Like I said, these weren't expensive coins. I'm happy that NGC took the time with them to "make it right" and explain the requirements to me. Now I'll know not to expect a PL designation for a coin with heavy die polish lines.

[MAULUMALL]

That is exemplary.

[keithdagen]

The World Cup dollar was awarded the PL designation. This coin was actually mis-slabbed by the competition as a proof. It is that PL.

 

The World Cup dollars and halves seem to be pretty easy to find with semi-PL surfaces. When collecting the commem series, I found these to be some of the hardest to find in high grade because the PL surfaces seemed to magnify any marks.

[Dog97]

Hey thanks for the update.

I'm a Morgan collector and as such am familiar with later state dies being polished and restoring PL qualities to a worn or damaged die and slabbing with the PL designation.

The process for Morgan dies were different though but wouldn't have realized old vs new minting process were taken into consideration to that extent when grading Moderns.

Makes sense though.

[gmarguli]

The World Cup dollar was awarded the PL designation. This coin was actually mis-slabbed by the competition as a proof. It is that PL.

 

The World Cup dollars and halves seem to be pretty easy to find with semi-PL surfaces. When collecting the commem series, I found these to be some of the hardest to find in high grade because the PL surfaces seemed to magnify any marks.

 

I actually looked at several of these before finding one that was nice and had PL surfaces. I noticed many had die polish lines that looked like hairlines. My coin was originally graded PR65. Now it is in an MS68PL slab.

[mark]

Greg:

 

Aren't you the tiniest, littlest, etty-bittiest amount peeved that it took 2 submissions to NGC to get 2 of your coins graded correctly?

 

On the other hand, I think the info from Rick Montgomery about what it takes to be PL is interesting and well worth the expenditure of (your... ) time. Plus I think the info that Rick himself replied also is worth the expenditurte of (your... ) time. By the way, do you notice any difference in how Rick responds now that he is over here at NGC as opposed to when he was at PCGS?

 

Mark

[gmarguli]

Greg: Aren't you the tiniest, littlest, etty-bittiest amount peeved that it took 2 submissions to NGC to get 2 of your coins graded correctly?

 

Well, I won't say it was the ideal situation. Sure, I wish that the coins had received the designations during their original submissions. However, I understand that they were submitted shortly after the designation went into affect for all coins (a state quarter, which they have been giving the PL designation to for a while, was given the designation by NGC) and that quite possibly the graders weren't thinking about assigning the PL grade to these coins.

 

The fact that NGC & Rick were so willing to re-examine the coins and correct the designations is a testament to their customer service friendliness.

 

I can also remember a couple of times before Rick arrived at NGC where John Maben told me I could send coins to his attention and he would examine them if I felt there was a problem or I needed an explanation.

 

Mistakes happen. It's how you deal with those mistakes that show what type of a business you are. One business told me to send the coins back and they took care of it. In the past, the other business told me to go myself and if I didn't like it I could right in the and back again . Of course that other business also ignored my emails, sent me TWO bills for something they said they’d pay for, never reimbursed me for my expenses like they said they would, hung up on me, never returned my phone calls, and told me it was MY PROBLEM!

 

Not getting the designation the first time wasn't the ideal situation. How NGC handled it was!

 

 

On the other hand, I think the info from Rick Montgomery about what it takes to be PL is interesting and well worth the expenditure of (your... ) time. Plus I think the info that Rick himself replied also is worth the expenditurte of (your... ) time. By the way, do you notice any difference in how Rick responds now that he is over here at NGC as opposed to when he was at PCGS?

 

No difference. Rick was always willing to respond to problems and complaints when he was at PCGS. I emailed him a question on policy once and got a reply very quickly. I asked him to look at a picture of some coins that were graded without the cameo designation as I thought they should have been. He responded quickly and I sent the coins to him. A short while later I got my coins back with the cameo designation on all but one and a note explaining why the last one didn't meet the cameo criteria.

 

My biggest problem with PCGS is the customer service who never seem available to help. They give wrong information. They don't respond to email or when they do it is frustrating. I actually have a comical email from them. I ask a simple question about being double billed for shipping and their response is about policy and safe space.

 

[michael]

great service i have had similar experiences

 

 

[jeffnpcb-migration]

The nail in the coffin for any business is lack of Customer Service! It would be wise for all companies in the coin industry to pay heed to this advice and for certain ones dropping that "Better than Thou" attitude!

 

[TomB]

I'm not surprised as to the cooperation you received as that has also been my experience, in the limited number of times I had needed it, with NGC.