Does cleaning a card matter?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Is the cleaning that was done to the Keeler something you want to be made aware of even if it doesn't alter the card in any way other than making it look better?

As an example, how would you answer the following question? I originally posed a similar question without the centering being involved because I wanted all things about the cards being equal except the cleaning up of the card and was told I should have posed the question this way.

you are offered two VG/EX 33 Goudey Babe Ruth cards. One is 70/30 centering with honest wear on the corners with decent eye appeal. The other is 50/50 centering, honest wear on the corners with killer eye appeal and you know the original owners initials were written lighly on the back. The writting was easily removed and was not longer detected. The surface is as original as the day it was printed. Which card would you rather have?

Jay

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

I don't believe that there can be agreement on philosophical discussions about cards. However, my 40% of a nickel is that if something is undetectable, it does not exist; independent of whether it formerly existed. Therefore, I prefer the card which is detectably in superior condition.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Very philosophical and is dependant on each persons view. Mine is absolutely if you take something off of a card that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place it's no harm no foul......visual appeal is my main focus and o/c cards have much less of it than cards with soft corners. To each their own.....later

[Archive]

Posted By: steve k

I will not buy a baseball card that has pencil, ink, or other marks received after the card was printed. Erased or not doesn't matter.

Something like the writing on Julie's Black Sox ticket is different. I have bought sports tickets with writing on them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Are you willing to negotiate a little regarding "pencil, ink or other marks" on cards which may be acceptable to you?

For example: some feel that genuine autographs can be acceptable, others collect counterstamped card backs, while writing reportedly done by highly visible hobbiests, such as Barker on OJ blank backs, actually add to the card's provenance, in the opinion of several.

These comprimizes to the "no marks" position of many collectors, only serves to open the door for further comprimizing. For me, that comprimizing extends beyond the requirement of "no distinuishable marks" through my actual position of - getting the best example of a card which I need without unnecessarilly financially impairing my ability to obtain the other cards which I need.

How about you?

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

We've been over this before. It is illegal in my state to sell a cleaned card w/o disclosure.

[Archive]

Posted By: HW

Warshawlaw,

Does that law define exactly what is legal to do and what is not? For instance, if I lived in California and I erased a small pencil mark off the back of my Zeenut, and then sold it on ebay without documenting it, would I be committing a crime?

I understand the need to disclose trimming, restoring corners and coloring borders, but what about removing something that was not originally there. To use the extreme example that was referenced in another thread, what if I accidentally spilled a drop of my Coke on the card, could I remove it?

I am not trying to be funny or make light of the subject, but am just trying to understand the the spirit of this law.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

Adam - what is the definition? For instance, if a chunk of peanut butter fell off my sandwich onto a card, could I dab it off with a wet cloth without disclosing it upon re-sell? What about bits of dried tobacco on a t206 - can I clean those off? ...or does California regard both actions as basically the same?

I understand that we've been over it before, but I have the same view-point on "cleaning" as Leon - if it wasn't there to begin with, and you can remove it without damaging the card, you should be free to. But if that action is something that might keep a reputable grading company from slabbing it, you should disclose, for example, erasures.

[Archive]

Posted By: HW

Scott,

In terms to erasures, what about a light pencil mark that does not leave an impression, and cannot be detected, even by a grading service?

[Archive]

Posted By: steve k

Gilbert - Actually my "no marks policy" goes beyond that with baseball cards. It's also no rips or tears, no printed area paper loss, no holes such as tack holes, and no glue or tape marks. Stains such as wax, gum, tobacco are acceptable depending on the card because to me that was part of the card in the distribution process. A very tough card with these stains, well centered, with honest wear doesn't bother me and these are in my collection. I understand what you are saying about the OJ cards and other collectables.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

of top-gloss loss where tape has been expetly removed in four small edge spots(card does not floresce, no pulling, no paper loss, no edge damage, no color change, nothin!) for considerably less than i would have had those four little marks not been present. An expert (not the buyer) said card would most likely not grade. If it does, I get more $$$. Buyer will get it holdered anyway (as "authentic") because he wants to protect card.

Oh--expert said PSA might grade it, because "they're idiots!" In other words, they might not notice. If a reputable compasny noticed, it would consider the spots of top-gloss loss "enhancement," because tape has obviously been removed.

Opinions? I've had "you got screwed," so you can leave that one out...

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

All erasures should be mentioned, even if you can no longer see the evidence yourself - a grading company might be able to detect it and you don't want someone else getting hosed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

of SGC, PSA or GAI actually putting a numerical grade on the thing.

Actually, when I first agreed to sell it, I had FORGOTTEN about the tape removal...I got the card from Lew Lipset, who told me about it. I remembered before buyer came to collect the card, so he had plenty of time (and opportunity--I said I wouldn't hold him to any offer at all) to back out, he didn't want to. It's the nicest Ruth he's got, he says--of the Sporting News variety, anyway.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Here is the exact definition in Business & Professions Code §21670(a):

"Altered or refurbished" means repair work which has been performed to enhance the value of the sports trading card as a collectible. This work includes, but is not limited to, filling in holes, building new corners, ironing out creases, or touching up the pictures or borders on the sports trading card."

"Includes but not limited to" is read expansively. If you erased the writing to enhance the value of the card, you had to disclose it to sell it here.

[Archive]

Posted By: HW

But, to use Scott's example from above, if I spilled peanut butter on my card and then wiped it off, would I be in violation of this law if I did not disclose this fact.

Also, does this law only pertain to sportscards, or are their similar laws for other collectibles such as cars, furniture, coins, clocks and other antiques?

[Archive]

Posted By: William Heitman

A pencil mark that has not made an impression into the surface of a card and can be removed without damage to the surface of the card is not damage. Therefore, removing it is not repairing it or restoring it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

A pencil mark that has not made an impression into the surface of a card and can be removed without damage to the surface of the card is not damage. Therefore, removing it is not repairing it or restoring it.

No fair using common sense. I agree with Scott that disclosing the info to a buyer is the right thing to do, though.

Adam - that strikes me as one of those unenforcable laws that California is so fond of. When in doubt, legislate.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

If someone erases a pencil mark and it leaves no indention and can't be seen I don't care.....but that's just me......regards

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

The rule is that you should disclose what you did to the card and let the bidders decide what is and what is not important. If you hide something because you think people will pay less if you told them, you're being unethical.

If you write in a sale, "There was a minor pencil mark that I carefully removed" the whole debate is moot as the potential buyers will know. And in the near future looking back, you will feel good yourself because you know you did the right thing.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I know a I spent a fair amount of time trying to figure out how to erase pencil from a card without leaving evidence that it was there. Even with the best professional art gum and architects erasers, I could never get the pencil erased without with leaving some sort of tell tale sign. Writing with a pencil and not leaving an indentation is almost impossible unless you are using a very soft lead to write with and the average person uses a #2 lead which is fairly hard.

Jay

Suppose you are an idiot...then suppose you are the President. Oh, wait. I'm repeating myself.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Consumer protection laws are not written for "enforcement" by the government, they are written to give private individuals who've been screwed on smaller transactions some real recourse. There are a number of these laws that cover "ordinary" situations we've all been in where we've all said "I wish that it was worth my while to go after them". Some other examples: we have a law that mandates that tow companies accept credit cards. If they refuse, they are liable for a fine plus attorneys' fees. If you've ever had to find an ATM at 1:00 in the morning in some rathole part of town because you got towed, you know how galling it is. We also have a law that requires tradesmen to keep appointments within a four-hour window or they are liable for a $500 fine plus attorneys' fees. Ever sat around the house all day waiting for the phone guy or cable guy to show up? If they do it to you here, you can make them pay for wasting your time. In the case of the card alteration law, the penalty provision of the law are as follows:

§ 21671. Alterations or refurbishments; certificates; violations; penalties
(a) Any sports trading card that is altered or refurbished shall be accompanied by a certificate stating the exact work done to the sports trading card, the date the work was performed, the cost of that work, and the name, phone number, and address of the person who performed the work.
(b) Any person or agent thereof, who knowingly sells or trades a sports card in violation of subdivision (a), shall both:
(1) Refund to the buyer, the full amount paid for the altered or refurbished sports trading card or the full retail value of any nonmonetary consideration received in exchange for the altered or refurbished sports trading card, or both.
(2) Be liable to the buyer for a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation. Each card sold represents a separate and distinct violation.

There is another catch-all law that provides for attorneys' fees to you if you win in a consumer protection case.

How does it work? Let's say you buy a card for a few hundred dollars, and let's say that the alterations to the card were outed on this Board, and let's say that the seller admitted he'd altered the card. Absent this law, you'd be looking at filing a case for a few hundred dollars in restitution, you'd probably not bother, and you'd be stuck. With this law, it is worthwhile to pursue the case, even to seek legal help in doing it.

Personally, I prefer living in a state where people can be made to pay in a meaningful way for cheating me and wasting my time. I'm about to file a towing case--my car got towed, illegally, from an unmarked parking lot in Hollywood and I had to chase around the a-hole of LA in the middle of the night looking for an ATM because the tow company refused credit cards. I am gonna make the parking lot operator and the tow company bleed for it.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Adam,
You are the man when it comes to knowing and investigating this type of law. You could run circles around me, if I were sprinting my fastest, on these topics. With that being said I still say there is absolutely no reason to mention the fact that I erased a pencil mark from a high end card (which I did) and even SGC didn't catch. If you can't see it, or see any at all evidence it was EVER there, then I just don't think it needs to be declared. Is that against the law? Yes, probably. In my pea sized brain it's like driving 56mph in a 55pmh zone....again, to each their own....I sort of live by the motto "no harm no foul"...and might be wrong in saying this but there it is.........thanks a lot for helping the board out on these matters too....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

What about the peanut butter and tobacco flake examples - how badly could you Californians reem someone over those examples?

This is all in fun, as I realize no one would sue over a peanut-butter or whip cream stain, but I AM currious where the line is drawn, as long as California law has been brought up.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred

LEON - please tell me it wasn't the 4BH Kelly.....

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Leon, people aren't fined $5,000 by a California court because they errased a small pencil mark on the back of a card. But a Californian 'submitting' his '52 Mantles to PRO for resale could get pretty poor pretty fast.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

In my eyes, the practical application of the California law is not lawsuits and lawyers' fees and fines and threats over errant pencil marks or peanutbutter stains. The practical everyday application is that things are clearly and specifically written out for the collector who is purchasing from a California seller ... A woman contacted me because she recently purchased a Salvador Dali print in Los Angeles, and was a bit nervous. I sent her a copy of the CA law, detailing what the seller was required to provide (LOA, guarantee, return policy, discosure if the item has been altered significantly, etc). If there is a question or a problem or a worry, she can refer to the law.

Also, let's say a genuinely bad seller did something genuinely bad-- ala selling a bunch of trimmed and highly altered to 'Mint' condition Mantle and Mays rookies for $50,000 to a newbee collector. The collector, who later realized he'd been cheated, can point out the law to the seller, and point out that the seller could be potenially be fined $5,000 per each dirty deed if this was taken to court. There's no doubt the potential for fines and that everything is spelled in law will make getting a refund that much easier.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

So they've made it illegal to do lots of things that they won't actually enforce in court? You would think that would encourage a lot of frivoulous law-suits in California.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

You mean like suing to get your $80,000 back from a sham dealer who sold you a forged Marc Chagall lithograph he knew was a forgery and in fact was the person who made it?

[Archive]

Posted By: Geno

If anyone has any vintage cards with moustaches, spectacles, antennas, etc drawn on, feel free to mail them to me. You can even erase them if you like and I'll redraw them on when they arrive. What if I draw on a 1989 Fleer card with a 1909 pencil, does that make it any more valuable? I'm so confused...

Have a great weekend, I'm off to Scotland for a week!
Geno

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

I used the word "frivoulous" and I wasn't being frivoulous when I chose that word.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Took an Old Judge HOF'er from a PSA6 MK to an SGC 80.....it wasn't Mr.Kelly......Jay M. could tell you that there was never a mark on the Kelly.....so could the previous owner before him, Lew Lipset....later