Posted By:
Andrew ParksA buyer wins an N29 Buck Ewing from an auction house. The description of that card in the auction house is, "Extremely nice copy. The width Measures 1/8” of an inch less than the listed size although the card is definitely not trimmed. The length is full size. Minor toning at the bottom and a clean back. MB $400.", and the auction has a 6" scan. The card goes for $500.00. The buyer doesn't know if this is a good deal or not. The card arrives and the buyer decides to get it graded. The card comes back "Evidence of Trimming" from SGC. The buyer writes the auctioneer to ask for a refund and the seller refuses for three reasons that he gives:
1) The decsription implied those problems.
2) The auction ended six weeks ago and the return policy is 21 days.
3) He doesn't accept the opinion of third party graders.
The buyer pleads again for a compromise suggesting that the auctioneer buy it back (his offer) or trade some of his personal cards for it. The auctioneer tells him no but that he would relist the item with the same exact description and not charge commission. The buyer tells him no because he wouldn't want an unsuspecting bidder to be in the same predicament he is in. The auctioneer says that there is no predicament, and that the auction was clear, questioning why anyone would submit a card to a grading company when it was short because no company accepts short cards for grade. The auctioneer suggests that he could offer it back to the original consigner or offer to the next two highest bidders.
The buyer calls SGC and speaks to a representative. The representative refutes the auctioneer's statement and says they absolutely accept short cards as long as there aren't the other signs of trimming. He continues that this particular card did not have the normal "strayations", was an angular cut and was "quite short". He added he would have their top two graders look at it and write a detailed letter on letterhead stating why it was trimmed.
The buyer tells the auctioneer that he needs to come up with a better compromise or he will be forced to offer the card for sale to the public following all the rules of "full disclosure". The buyer proposes that the auctioneer buy the card back for $400 and then he can do whatever he wants with the card. The seller doesn't wish to play the waiting game to see if if the bidders will accept. Who knows when the transaction would be completed? The auctioneer comes back by suggesting the buyer was threatening him.
The auctioneer states that the seller has some nerve dictating demands and that this issue was done. The buyer tells the auctioneer that it sounded as if he made his choice. The auctioneer responds by calling the buyer a a**hole, telling the buyer any moron could make money off that card, that he had the card sold for $400+ to the next highest bidder that morning, calls the buyer an "arrogant piece of sh**" and that three lawyers said the buyer threatened him.
My questions:
1) Did the auctioneer act unethically at any point?
2) Did the buyer threaten him? And if so is that illegal?
3) If you were the buyer, what would YOU have done?
4) Do you have any other opinions?
5) What could the buyer expect to get for the card given the rest of the card is VgEx?