Class action suit filed against PSA, PWCC and Probstein

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by todeen

And especially strip cards and T206 which were not systematically cut like modern cards. This will be hard to prove.

What about with the thousands of "before and after" photos, showing the cards to be indisputably trimmed to a smaller size. There are a plethora of "maraca" cards that used to fit snugly and now have significant air space.

These pics do not lie, and will be quite impactful if it goes to trial. The plaintiffs should have a wealth of evidence... probably more than any judge or jury could handle.

[Arazi4442]

I'm by no means a lawyer but I'm always a little concerned about situations like this. It seems if the first bullet fired isn't well thought out, it can derail the entire effort.

Like if this lawsuit is done halfway or if there's some technical error and the case is summarily dismissed, it opens the door for PSA, PWCC, etc. to say "see, we weren't doing anything wrong - the case was dismissed" and it's business as usual for them, making the second attempt that much harder.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Arazi4442

I'm by no means a lawyer but I'm always a little concerned about situations like this. It seems if the first bullet fired isn't well thought out, it can derail the entire effort.

Like if this lawsuit is done halfway or if there's some technical error and the case is summarily dismissed, it opens the door for PSA, PWCC, etc. to say "see, we weren't doing anything wrong - the case was dismissed" and it's business as usual for them, making the second attempt that much harder.

A "technical error" would not be a decision on the merits and almost certainly would not prevent the action from being re-filed and served, there or elsewhere and upon whomever is appropriate.

A complaint is just that, a series of allegations that can be developed, amended, discarded or supplemented as time passes. It is designed and required to put a defendant on notice of the types of conduct that Plaintiff believes comprise legally recognized claims, so that Defendant is not left guessing as to what it supposedly did wrong. It is not intended to spell out specifically each and every transgression, or comprise "proof" of each matter alleged.

[Arazi4442]

Thanks, Todd. Maybe "technicality" was a better word choice than "technical error". Either way, without getting into politics, it reminds me of a line from All the President's Men - If you shoot too high and miss, everyone feels more secure

Originally Posted by nolemmings

A "technical error" would not be a decision on the merits and almost certainly would not prevent the action from being re-filed and served, there or elsewhere and upon whomever is appropriate.

A complaint is just that, a series of allegations that can be developed, amended, discarded or supplemented as time passes. It is designed and required to put a defendant on notice of the types of conduct that Plaintiff believes comprise legally recognized claims, so that Defendant is not left guessing as to what it supposedly did wrong. It is not intended to spell out specifically each and every transgression, or comprise "proof" of each matter alleged.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by perezfan

These pics do not lie, and will be quite impactful if it goes to trial. The plaintiffs should have a wealth of evidence... probably more than any judge or jury could handle.

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

[BeanTown]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

Maybe graders were told what to do or who submitted? Maybe graders knew what to do when cards were submitted in certain unique holders with markings. Start with the graders and submitters who benefited and work your way up the food chain.

[h2oya311]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

It should be worded that PSA knowingly assigned numeric grades to altered cards. Everyone knows that they grade altered cards. Just sayin'

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

The question should be...

How can a company who bills itself as the "largest and most trusted third-party grading and authentication company in the world" and states "when you buy a PSA-graded collectible or submit an item to PSA for grading, you get the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby", plead ignorance here? If they can't identify an altered card, how can they promise what they do?

A company that did that would be guilty of something, right?

Or am I missing something?

[sebie43]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

The question should be...



How can a company who bills itself as the "largest and most trusted third-party grading and authentication company in the world" and states "when you buy a PSA-graded collectible or submit an item to PSA for grading, you get the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby", plead ignorance here? If they can't identify an altered card, how can they promise what they do?



A company that did that would be guilty of something, right?



Or am I missing something?

+1

[Republicaninmass]

Where is our resident Thing #2,

"there is a lawsuit so it must mean something! "

[Ronnie73]

Everyone is bringing up valid points. I just hope it doesn't tarnish the hobby any more than the grading scandal already has.

[Steve D]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

The question should be...

How can a company who bills itself as the "largest and most trusted third-party grading and authentication company in the world" and states "when you buy a PSA-graded collectible or submit an item to PSA for grading, you get the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby", plead ignorance here? If they can't identify an altered card, how can they promise what they do?

A company that did that would be guilty of something, right?

Or am I missing something?

It seems to me, they are simply saying that they provide "the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby". This does not mean the item is 100% accurately graded; it simply means that PSA feels that they come closest to the 100% accurate threshold.

PSA could have 50% accuracy over-all. If no other TPG hits the 50% mark or higher, then PSA is correct in their assertion that they are "the most accurate".

Steve

[Misunderestimated]

Was PSA the first card-grading company ?
I thought it was the SGC predecessor run by Dave Foreman "SCG" or something..... I used to have a T205 Jennings that was in their holder which was like an early SGC holder black....

--
It's not relevant to the merits of the complaint. I just wondered...

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by Steve D

It seems to me, they are simply saying that they provide "the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby". This does not mean the item is 100% accurately graded; it simply means that PSA feels that they come closest to the 100% accurate threshold.

PSA could have 50% accuracy over-all. If no other TPG hits the 50% mark or higher, then PSA is correct in their assertion that they are "the most accurate".

Steve

In order for that to be true, there must be an enormous amount of SGC and Beckett altered cards. Anybody suing them?

[Steve D]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

In order for that to be true, there must be an enormous amount of SGC and Beckett altered cards. Anybody suing them?

The problem is, exactly how does one quantify the accuracy level of a particular TPG? Who do you go to, to accomplish it?

For example, in autograph collecting, Charles Hamilton was considered the foremost authenticator in the business. In sub-areas of autograph collecting, there are certain authenticators who specialize in signatures; i.e., in astronaut autographs, Steve Zarelli is probably the #1 authenticator.

In fine art, there are people who are considered the foremost experts on a particular artist, say van Gogh or Rembrandt.

Who is the #1 card grader/authenticator, who could determine, to a level that is "legally sufficient" in a court of law, PSA's accuracy compared to other TPGs.

Without a legally sufficient "expert witness", I just don't see PSA's claim of being the "most accurate", being a problem for them. It is essentially just their opinion.

Also, to what level will a court of law require, for alleged proof that the card shown in "before" picture A, is actually the exact same card shown in "after" picture B. We all have our opinions and feelings about all the cards reported/"outed" in this ongoing scandal; but we all know that pictures can be manipulated. The same card can look completely different in scans taken with different scanners, depending on the individual scanner's settings. We also know that the card stock is not always "perfect"; there are usually defects in the stock. Printing methods used for a particular card can show recurring identical defects in a particular card; i.e., 1976 Topps George Brett & 1978 Topps Molitor/Trammell. The simple fact that two different pictures of cards that show the same perceived defect(s), show cards that have different grades, but otherwise cannot be differentiated, does not mean that the cards in the two pictures, are actually the same exact card.

Steve

[hcv123]

1 - At the very least this action will hopefully make the whole "slabgate" more visible to more people - we should all forward to local, regional and national media - some of them will pick it up.
2 - This will necessitate $$$ coming out of the pockets of some who have been lining their pockets for if nothing else their defense.
3 - Attorney question - what is the yardstick here - "preponderance of evidence", "beyond a reasonable doubt", or something else?
4 - Presuming something short of beyond a reasonable doubt - while I believe some of the accusations although true will be difficult to prove - others - not so much - The most glaring thing to me is that a company (PSA) who's underlying foundation is its self proclaimed ability to identify cards that have been altered, their charging fees to do so, customers reliance on the same and PSA's clear incompetence (in a best case scenario) in doing so!
5 - Even if some of what has been alleged is proven, it will be a good thing.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Steve D

Without a legally sufficient "expert witness", I just don't see PSA's claim of being the "most accurate", being a problem for them. It is essentially just their opinion.

Also, to what level will a court of law require, for alleged proof that the card shown in "before" picture A, is actually the exact same card shown in "after" picture B. We all have our opinions and feelings about all the cards reported/"outed" in this ongoing scandal; but we all know that pictures can be manipulated. The same card can look completely different in scans taken with different scanners, depending on the individual scanner's settings. We also know that the card stock is not always "perfect"; there are usually defects in the stock. Printing methods used for a particular card can show recurring identical defects in a particular card; i.e., 1976 Topps George Brett & 1978 Topps Molitor/Trammell. The simple fact that two different pictures of cards that show the same perceived defect(s), show cards that have different grades, but otherwise cannot be differentiated, does not mean that the cards in the two pictures, are actually the same exact card.

Steve

It differs for different sets.

The 40's-some more recent date depending on the manufacturer, those fiber defects are like a fingerprint.
I'd think that if someone had an altered card, physically entered as evidence (Hoping I got the term right there) And the before scan, that would be conclusive. The person who made the before scan would have no reason to add portions of the card that were never there AND to digitally fake the fiber aspects of the cardstock.

Many of the earlier modern cards were serially numbered from the factory, and while the look and colors can vary, it's not likely that the amount of picture visible along an edge would change based on the scanner.
That's what the before and after scans show, things like the sole of a shoe with some sliver of background between it and the edge of the card then later that shoe on the same card touching or partly cut away by the edge.
And again, there's no reason for the before scan to have been faked. Some show slight corner flaws, and the after doesn't. Why would a seller add fake wear to a card they were selling? The simple answer is that they wouldn't.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by Steve D

Also, to what level will a court of law require, for alleged proof that the card shown in "before" picture A, is actually the exact same card shown in "after" picture B. We all have our opinions and feelings about all the cards reported/"outed" in this ongoing scandal; but we all know that pictures can be manipulated. The same card can look completely different in scans taken with different scanners, depending on the individual scanner's settings. We also know that the card stock is not always "perfect"; there are usually defects in the stock. Printing methods used for a particular card can show recurring identical defects in a particular card; i.e., 1976 Topps George Brett & 1978 Topps Molitor/Trammell. The simple fact that two different pictures of cards that show the same perceived defect(s), show cards that have different grades, but otherwise cannot be differentiated, does not mean that the cards in the two pictures, are actually the same exact card.

Steve

You seriously need to read the Blowout posts, look at the before and after pictures, and stop wasting our time. We are way past the “it might not be the same card” stage. There is no doubt.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by Steve D

It seems to me, they are simply saying that they provide "the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby". This does not mean the item is 100% accurately graded; it simply means that PSA feels that they come closest to the 100% accurate threshold.

PSA could have 50% accuracy over-all. If no other TPG hits the 50% mark or higher, then PSA is correct in their assertion that they are "the most accurate".

Steve

And I'll add, if a card grading and "authentication" expert can't validate the most basic of criteria...is the card authentic...they have no business calling themselves experts. In fact, they have no business being in that business.

[GeoPoto]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

And I'll add, if a card grading and "authentication" expert can't validate the most basic of criteria...is the card authentic...they have no business calling themselves experts. In fact, they have no business being in that business.

You are using "authentic" to mean "not altered". PSA is not even accused of failing to screen out counterfeit cards. The cases of interest involve cards with alterations that cannot be discerned using methods consistent with affordable prices. The only reason Blowout can prove cards have been altered is that they were previously graded. Blowout is not identifying alterations that may have occurred before a card was first graded. If PSA can be shown to use reasonable methods consistently and objectively, they can defend themselves; if they can be shown to intervene in those methods to inflate certain grades in order to further their own interests, they will be guilty of fraud, or something. My guess is the former will hold and combined with "improved" methods going forward, PSA will avoid the fallout and continue to be viewed as "authentication experts", albeit not perfect at flagging alterations that are not discernable using methods consistent with popular prices. Meanwhile, the market will continue to sort out pricing in light of the inability of PSA to catch all alterations.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by GeoPoto

You are using "authentic" to mean "not altered". PSA is not even accused of failing to screen out counterfeit cards. The cases of interest involve cards with alterations that cannot be discerned using methods consistent with affordable prices. The only reason Blowout can prove cards have been altered is that they were previously graded. Blowout is not identifying alterations that may have occurred before a card was first graded. If PSA can be shown to use reasonable methods consistently and objectively, they can defend themselves; if they can be shown to intervene in those methods to inflate certain grades in order to further their own interests, they will be guilty of fraud, or something. My guess is the former will hold and combined with "improved" methods going forward, PSA will avoid the fallout and continue to be viewed as "authentication experts", albeit not perfect at flagging alterations that are not discernable using methods consistent with popular prices. Meanwhile, the market will continue to sort out pricing in light of the inability of PSA to catch all alterations.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Authentic and not altered are synonymous. Authentic means genuine. Is that a genuine PSA 8? No it is not.

The defense of and excuses for PSA here are not just shocking, but I'm guessing self serving. They've rendered everyone's collection suspect by not fulfilling the promise they made to collectors...and I think a lot of people don't want to believe that.

[Copa7]

Originally Posted by fballguy

the question should be...

How can a company who bills itself as the "largest and most trusted third-party grading and authentication company in the world" and states "when you buy a psa-graded collectible or submit an item to psa for grading, you get the most accurately graded collectible in the hobby", plead ignorance here? If they can't identify an altered card, how can they promise what they do?

A company that did that would be guilty of something, right?

Or am i missing something?

+100

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

Ted...

Regarding my "before and after" comment... I was just addressing the statement made prior to my post, which referred to the air space between the cards' edges and the "bumpers". The statement opined that there are different sizes of slab openings and tolerable variances on card sizes. This was stated to rebuff/invalidate the plaintiff's "excessive air space" accusation.

My "before and after" comment was referencing the change in air space between the original and altered versions of the same card. We've seen it hundreds (if not thousands) of times on Blowout.... the same cards with indisputable/identical paper fiber identifiers. These cards fit much more snugly in their original and pre-altered state. It's very easy to visually demonstrate and document these before/after differences, and there are thousands of examples that would serve as evidence.

That's what I was referring to. With regard to how can one prove that PSA knowingly graded altered cads... that will be incumbent upon the plaintiff's legal team to convey. It's safe to say there's a mountain of evidence to plow through, and none of us know the inside connections or inner-workings at PSA.

That is, unless someone here is a former PSA employee or a fly on the wall. But unfortunately the former employee probably has a gag order or NDA, and the fly can't speak English (other than to say Heeeeelp Me!)

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Ted...

Regarding my "before and after" comment... I was just addressing the statement made prior to my post, which referred to the air space between the cards' edges and the "bumpers". The statement opined that there are different sizes of slab openings and tolerable variances on card sizes. This was stated to rebuff/invalidate the plaintiff's "excessive air space" accusation.

My "before and after" comment was referencing the change in air space between the original and altered versions of the same card. We've seen it hundreds (if not thousands) of times on Blowout.... the same cards with indisputable/identical paper fiber identifiers. These cards fit much more snugly in their original and pre-altered state. It's very easy to visually demonstrate and document these before/after differences, and there are thousands of examples that would serve as evidence.

That's what I was referring to. With regard to how can one prove that PSA knowingly graded altered cads... that will be incumbent upon the plaintiff's legal team to convey. It's safe to say there's a mountain of evidence to plow through, and none of us know the inside connections or inner-workings at PSA.

That is, unless someone here is a former PSA employee or a fly on the wall. But unfortunately the former employee probably has a gag order or NDA, and the fly can't speak English (other than to say Heeeeelp Me!)

Ted doesn't see it because he is a blind bat apologist and just can't stop the POP. He's Teddy Blind Bat. Loves to take the asses point of view. That's OK, more power to Teddy Blind Bat.

Let's move on to some more humor, which Teddy Blind Bat won't get.
I appreciate Sports Card Radio using a few of my industry nicknames and Here's a couple of bozo's in the first series! Nice Job!

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...&postcount=125

Let's not forget the ring Leader BRENT MASTRO!

[CMIZ5290]

Nothing, and I mean nothing, will happen to Probstein or Brent.... They have been laughing all the way to the bank and will continue to do so (Ebay has a lot to do with this). I would also be shocked if anything comes down on PSA... There you have it

[swarmee]

I wonder if they'll add anything about obstruction from removing certification numbers from their online database or eliminating the ability to contact their defrauded buyers by removing accounts of ne'er-do-wells like me who criticize them online.
I heard from another board member a few days ago who was told by PSA that his business is no longer welcome after being critical of the company online. So you better be nice to the company if you keep wanting to ride the gravy train! ;-)

[irishdenny]

He Connects idiots like me to the Brilliant Lawyer's who Like $$$$$$$$.$$

https://topclassactions.com/category...nvestigations/

at least i'm Happy All the TiMe!!!

Jus wanna say that i mostly agree wit the initial verbal genius ~

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Hi Mark! Just playing devil's advocate


A. PSA Knowingly Graded Altered Cards

How can one prove this?

Because they call themselves experts at authentication. How can they be if they can't detect an altered card? Sounds like a fraud one way or the other.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Because they call themselves experts at authentication. How can they be if they can't detect an altered card? Sounds like a fraud one way or the other.

Its their opinion I opine

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Because they call themselves experts at authentication. How can they be if they can't detect an altered card? Sounds like a fraud one way or the other.

Rob,

Don't disagree with you at all, but here in a nutshell is where/how we all get screwed.

There is absolutely nothing illegal about trimming, altering, or doing anything else your heart desires to a baseball (or any) card you own. There is also absolutely nothing illegal about submitting an altered or trimmed card to a third-party grading company or service. And to my knowledge, there is no legal requirement that you tell any such TPG you submit a card to that it has been altered, trimmed, or doctored in any way, by you or anyone else. Now as for the TPGs examining said cards, they explicitly have it worded in their documentation and agreements that they are only giving their "opinion" as to a card's authenticity and condition. How do/can you ask a jury to find someone guilty of simply giving their "opinion" about something, especially when there is no single recognized, documented, and/or enforced set of codified standards or measures that a TPG, and their individual card graders, are required to follow? Short answer - you can't.

Card graders are not licensed by any independent, overseeing authorities, like say doctors, CPas, licensed architects, etc. There is no single, unchanging set of card grading standards to hold any TPG and their card graders to. Look at how many times on just this forum alone we've discussed how different TPGs all seem to have their own separate grading standards, and how even those standards appear to continually change over time. And also, not everyone in the hobby is in agreement as to what exactly constitutes an alteration or doctoring of a card. In fact, there are those that look upon such work as perfectly acceptable restoration or preservation of a card. Again, just on this forum alone, we have threads where soaking, erasing marks, removal of glue and stains, pressing out creases, and so on, are discussed and considered at different levels of acceptability by different people. So, if we in the hobby can't possibly all agree on one single, unchanging, recognized and documented set of standards and measures regarding the authentication and grading of cards, how could we expect some jury to ever find anyone guilty of having committed a crime regarding the grading, authentication, and sale of supposedly altered and doctored cards?

If anything, you'd likely have better luck prevailing against Ebay in their claims that their new authentication program virtually guarantees you'll get authentic cards, and as described. The independent TPG doing that authentication work is once again, only giving their "opinion", so how could Ebay truly guarantee anything? They really can't. But if you dig deep into Ebay's terms and conditions regarding this newly offered service, I wouldn't be surprised to find wording that helps to protect and/or indemnify them from any such potential claims.

And the worst thing is, there's not a whole lot we can do about any of this.

[Peter_Spaeth]

PSA will not grade items which bear evidence of trimming, recoloring, restoration or any other form of tampering, or are of questionable authenticity, and Customer agrees not to knowingly submit any such items. Customer agrees that in the event PSA rejects any items for grading, PSA shall not refund the amount paid by Customer because the determination to reject an item requires a review by PSA's graders and authenticators. Customer represents and warrants that he/she has no knowledge and no reasonable basis to believe that any item submitted for grading has been altered in any way or is not genuine. For purposes of this Agreement, “altered items” shall have the meaning set forth in the applicable Dealer Agreement or PSA Collectors Club Agreement by and between Customer and PSA (the “Customer Agreement”). If Customer has not entered into the Customer Agreement, Customer hereby agrees to be bound by the terms of the Customer Agreement, a copy of which can be found at PSAcard.com/join, and Customer's acceptance of this Agreement shall constitute Customer's signature on the Customer Agreement. Customer reaffirms its obligations with respect to Doctored items set forth in the Customer Agreement.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

PSA will not grade items which bear evidence of trimming, recoloring, restoration or any other form of tampering, or are of questionable authenticity, and Customer agrees not to knowingly submit any such items. Customer agrees that in the event PSA rejects any items for grading, PSA shall not refund the amount paid by Customer because the determination to reject an item requires a review by PSA's graders and authenticators. Customer represents and warrants that he/she has no knowledge and no reasonable basis to believe that any item submitted for grading has been altered in any way or is not genuine. For purposes of this Agreement, “altered items” shall have the meaning set forth in the applicable Dealer Agreement or PSA Collectors Club Agreement by and between Customer and PSA (the “Customer Agreement”). If Customer has not entered into the Customer Agreement, Customer hereby agrees to be bound by the terms of the Customer Agreement, a copy of which can be found at PSAcard.com/join, and Customer's acceptance of this Agreement shall constitute Customer's signature on the Customer Agreement. Customer reaffirms its obligations with respect to Doctored items set forth in the Customer Agreement.

Peter,

I see and understand what you're trying to do, but my comment about submitting altered cards to a TPG was that it is not illegal. What you just printed is the type of lawyer-speak that a TPG has in their agreements and documents to CTA (cover their asses), pure and simple. Absolutely nowhere does anything indicate there is an illegality to anyone for submitting something to a TPG that they know to be altered. Otherwise, why doesn't a TPG ever contact police when they get something that they see has been tampered with, and continue getting submissions from the same submitter they've found to give them such altered items, over and over again? That TPG language you printed is to make sure that they can have plausible deniability if there does turn out to be some blowback to a TPG for an altered item that is "accidently" graded and slabbed by them, and to also reinforce the fact that they get to charge for whatever they look at and grade, and keep the money, regardless of them finding it altered or not.

I honestly don't know the answer to this question, but for a card grading submission to PSA (or any other TPG for that matter), is there a specific question anywhere on their paperwork/application/submission form/whatever that directly asks the submitter if they are knowingly submitting an altered or trimmed card to them for grading? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that is a big "NO". Reason being of course that if they did, and someone was actually dumb enough to answer that yes, they were trying to submit an altered/trimmed card for grading, the TPG would have to immediately nix the submission since they specifically state they do not grade such cards. And then they couldn't charge for it and get to keep the grading fee money.

Allow me to translate what you just printed into very simple laymen's terminology:

Don't ever tell us you are submitting an altered, doctored, or trimmed card to us for grading, because if you do, we can only give it an authentic grade, at best, and we can't really charge you for it then unless you still want it with an "A" grade. But if you do ever submit an altered, doctored, or trimmed card for grading without telling us, and you did such a piss-poor job that even we can catch it, it will only get an "authentic" grade, at best, and we're keeping your money. And on the off chance you did such a good job with the altering, doctoring, or trimming, to the point where we our graders couldn't detect it or just plain missed it, we'll grade it. But if it ever comes back later on that the card you submitted was altered, doctored, or trimmed, it is your fault and responsibility because you didn't tell us up front.

I think that is pretty close to the true meaning.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Bob you're sort of knocking down a straw man because nobody has ever suggested merely trimming a card or submitting it for grading without subsequently SELLING it is illegal. It's the sale part that's the problem, and then it all becomes a problem. And if a TPG is knowingly grading altered cards it knows are going to be sold, it's arguably aiding and abetting the fraud.

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by BobC

…And the worst thing is, there's not a whole lot we can do about any of this.

All we can do as collectors is try not to get duped in the process.

Excellent post Bob.

Butch

[clydepepper]

I'm glad that sh*t probstein is included.

Karma!



.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

I'm glad that sh*t probstein is included.

Karma!



.

The suit has been settled, and in all likelihood for a token amount.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

Rob,

Don't disagree with you at all, but here in a nutshell is where/how we all get screwed.

There is absolutely nothing illegal about trimming, altering, or doing anything else your heart desires to a baseball (or any) card you own. There is also absolutely nothing illegal about submitting an altered or trimmed card to a third-party grading company or service. And to my knowledge, there is no legal requirement that you tell any such TPG you submit a card to that it has been altered, trimmed, or doctored in any way, by you or anyone else. Now as for the TPGs examining said cards, they explicitly have it worded in their documentation and agreements that they are only giving their "opinion" as to a card's authenticity and condition. How do/can you ask a jury to find someone guilty of simply giving their "opinion" about something, especially when there is no single recognized, documented, and/or enforced set of codified standards or measures that a TPG, and their individual card graders, are required to follow? Short answer - you can't.

Card graders are not licensed by any independent, overseeing authorities, like say doctors, CPas, licensed architects, etc. There is no single, unchanging set of card grading standards to hold any TPG and their card graders to. Look at how many times on just this forum alone we've discussed how different TPGs all seem to have their own separate grading standards, and how even those standards appear to continually change over time. And also, not everyone in the hobby is in agreement as to what exactly constitutes an alteration or doctoring of a card. In fact, there are those that look upon such work as perfectly acceptable restoration or preservation of a card. Again, just on this forum alone, we have threads where soaking, erasing marks, removal of glue and stains, pressing out creases, and so on, are discussed and considered at different levels of acceptability by different people. So, if we in the hobby can't possibly all agree on one single, unchanging, recognized and documented set of standards and measures regarding the authentication and grading of cards, how could we expect some jury to ever find anyone guilty of having committed a crime regarding the grading, authentication, and sale of supposedly altered and doctored cards?

If anything, you'd likely have better luck prevailing against Ebay in their claims that their new authentication program virtually guarantees you'll get authentic cards, and as described. The independent TPG doing that authentication work is once again, only giving their "opinion", so how could Ebay truly guarantee anything? They really can't. But if you dig deep into Ebay's terms and conditions regarding this newly offered service, I wouldn't be surprised to find wording that helps to protect and/or indemnify them from any such potential claims.

And the worst thing is, there's not a whole lot we can do about any of this.

Your third paragraph is fallacious reasoning. There is clear hobby consensus, and even PSA's terms and conditions admit, that trimming and recoloring are unacceptable alteration. It's irrelevant that there are other things people don't agree on. Slippery slope fallacy. Assuming the evidence supported it, a jury could easily find that the knowing sale without disclosure of a trimmed card was fraud. There are detailed discussions of this by me and others from early in the scandal. I don't have the energy or motivation to find them.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Your third paragraph is fallacious reasoning. There is clear hobby consensus, and even PSA's terms and conditions admit, that trimming and recoloring are unacceptable alteration. It's irrelevant that there are other things people don't agree on. Slippery slope fallacy. Assuming the evidence supported it, a jury could easily find that the knowing sale without disclosure of a trimmed card was fraud. There are detailed discussions of this by me and others from early in the scandal. I don't have the energy or motivation to find them.

What clear hobby consensus? There are some people that are all for restoration, and very many others that allow, or at least put up with, various other forms of alterations or doctoring. Hell, the very first card ever graded by PSA, and what is likely to become the most valuable card ever sold once again, next time it gets sold, is a known altered/trimmed card in a PSA 8 holder. What do you honestly think PSA would do should its current owner come back to them with the Gretzky Wagner, and ask that it be re-holdered?

We have been discussing for years how the grading standards and measures of TPGs are not the same, and how they keep changing over the years. All you'd have to do is grab different graded cards of different TPGs over the years, and show them to a jury for themselves to decide if what was graded as a 4 on different cards actually looks the same to them. And remember, chances of an actual card collector being allowed to stay on a jury by the defense is slim to none, at best. For criminal prosecution the standard is still to my knowledge " beyond a reasonable doubt". You, my friend, may be a little biased because of your own card collecting background and knowledge, and assume a jury will be of somewhat comparable thinking and experience. I'm going to guess they won't. And once they start hearing about all the different companies, graders, issues, etc., there are likely going to be a lot of doubts creeping into their minds.

I could go back and look for your own words in various posts, but let me paraphrase what I believe you yourself have stated in the past, knowing someone is guilty is one thing, but you can't always prove it in a court of law.

As I look at it, I'm afraid that the only way we may finally get someone convicted of a crime in all this fraud is if law enforcement and prosecutors can actually get someone directly involved in it to flip and testify against others directly involved. The participants that may, or may not, be involved in such fraud are not stupid though, and I doubt they would voluntarily turn on each other at this point. Unless they can get nailed for something else and only see making a deal with prosecutors as a way out by basically turning states evidence. As of now, it doesn't look like that is happening though.

Along those lines, I believe I remember reading elsewhere on this forum that Brent from PWCC was initially cooperating with investigators on the alteration/trimming fraud case. And then suddenly, he was not anymore. If actually true, that is a very interesting and intriguing development, don't you think? In potential cases like this, involving multiple companies and people, sometimes learning to say nothing is the best defense of all. There's an awful lot of truth to the old adage that ignorance (or at least the projection of such) is bliss!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

What clear hobby consensus? There are some people that are all for restoration, and very many others that allow, or at least put up with, various other forms of alterations or doctoring. Hell, the very first card ever graded by PSA, and what is likely to become the most valuable card ever sold once again, next time it gets sold, is a known altered/trimmed card in a PSA 8 holder. What do you honestly think PSA would do should its current owner come back to them with the Gretzky Wagner, and ask that it be re-holdered?

We have been discussing for years how the grading standards and measures of TPGs are not the same, and how they keep changing over the years. All you'd have to do is grab different graded cards of different TPGs over the years, and show them to a jury for themselves to decide if what was graded as a 4 on different cards actually looks the same to them. And remember, chances of an actual card collector being allowed to stay on a jury by the defense is slim to none, at best. For criminal prosecution the standard is still to my knowledge " beyond a reasonable doubt". You, my friend, may be a little biased because of your own card collecting background and knowledge, and assume a jury will be of somewhat comparable thinking and experience. I'm going to guess they won't. And once they start hearing about all the different companies, graders, issues, etc., there are likely going to be a lot of doubts creeping into their minds.

I could go back and look for your own words in various posts, but let me paraphrase what I believe you yourself have stated in the past, knowing someone is guilty is one thing, but you can't always prove it in a court of law.

As I look at it, I'm afraid that the only way we may finally get someone convicted of a crime in all this fraud is if law enforcement and prosecutors can actually get someone directly involved in it to flip and testify against others directly involved. The participants that may, or may not, be involved in such fraud are not stupid though, and I doubt they would voluntarily turn on each other at this point. Unless they can get nailed for something else and only see making a deal with prosecutors as a way out by basically turning states evidence. As of now, it doesn't look like that is happening though.

Along those lines, I believe I remember reading elsewhere on this forum that Brent from PWCC was initially cooperating with investigators on the alteration/trimming fraud case. And then suddenly, he was not anymore. If actually true, that is a very interesting and intriguing development, don't you think? In potential cases like this, involving multiple companies and people, sometimes learning to say nothing is the best defense of all. There's an awful lot of truth to the old adage that ignorance (or at least the projection of such) is bliss!

Brent was definitely cooperating at one point, as acknowledged by his counsel at the time.

On another point, yes it's difficult to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under the rules of evidence in many cases even where the person is guilty, but in this case that wouldn't be because of any doubt that trimming is an impermissible alteration, on that point I would not be troubled. It would clearly be a material omission not to disclose a card is trimmed. You don't need an absolute consensus to establish that anyhow.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by BobC

And remember, chances of an actual card collector being allowed to stay on a jury by the defense is slim to none, at best.

They should make the entire jury card collectors...let the hobby decide how criminal something is!

[drcy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

What about with the thousands of "before and after" photos, showing the cards to be indisputably trimmed to a smaller size. There are a plethora of "maraca" cards that used to fit snugly and now have significant air space.

These pics do not lie, and will be quite impactful if it goes to trial. The plaintiffs should have a wealth of evidence... probably more than any judge or jury could handle.

"The bank bag in the dumpster near my home does not prove beyond a doubt that I robbed a bank."
"But the video of you robbing the bank does."
"Oh."

[Rhotchkiss]

This is AWESOME, at least with respect to PSA.

Do they need to disclose this on financial reports and/or reserve for this contingent liability?

I have spoken to several members (and former members) about buying a high-profile card graded by PSA that we can prove has been altered, sending it in under their guaranty and then suing them when they failed to honor it. I am still up for that, sign me up. But in the meantime, I love to see this suit filed against PSA. And, I would love to join the Class, I just have no discernible proof that I can (yet)

[todeen]

Originally Posted by perezfan

What about with the thousands of "before and after" photos, showing the cards to be indisputably trimmed to a smaller size. There are a plethora of "maraca" cards that used to fit snugly and now have significant air space.

These pics do not lie, and will be quite impactful if it goes to trial. The plaintiffs should have a wealth of evidence... probably more than any judge or jury could handle.

You and I are on the same page, but talking different points. If you have two T206 Speaker cards, or strip card Speaker cards, there is a chance they were cut differently and will not fit into the sleeve exactly the same. So there is not always a reason to suspect foul play because of air space. But for knowledgeable individuals, maybe they would look extra close at the edges.

Whereas, what you refer to in your comment above, "before and after" pictures of the exact same card will show variation and will have air space. I have gone over to blowout and seen some of their investigative work, and I am quite impressed.