ethical question

[Misunderestimated]

Ethically I would say that one does not have to accept the return if its based on the TPG's guarantee (that's my preliminary legal conclusion too-- without having researched it etc.)

But I would under most circumstances accept the return as a best practice -- not because I had to or even out of an ethical compulsion. It just seems right to me.

But I'm not envisioning a scenario with a huge amount of money at stake which might force me (or anyone else) to be reticent simply because I could not afford to reimburse on the spot without missing a mortgage payment or something.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Misunderestimated

Ethically I would say that one does not have to accept the return if its based on the TPG's guarantee (that's my preliminary legal conclusion too-- without having researched it etc.)

But I would under most circumstances accept the return as a best practice -- not because I had to or even out of an ethical compulsion. It just seems right to me.

But I'm not envisioning a scenario with a huge amount of money at stake which might force me (or anyone else) to be reticent simply because I could not afford to reimburse on the spot without missing a mortgage payment or something.

Legally, why can't the buyer rescind based on the doctrine of mutual mistake?

[wondo]

I'd evaluate on each individual case, but would certainly lean to making it right with the buyer.

Seems like a convenient dodge for a number of expert collectors / dealers who disparage TPGs; all of a sudden hiding behind the TPG guarantee. Pathetic and disgusting. This behavior is why TPGs got a foothold in the first place.

There have been examples of what folks are calling obvious alterations when the card is exposed - where the hell were the expert dealers when the card was sold? Cashing the check, that's where.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think both Ed and John, almost simultaneously, both state the case very well.

[Misunderestimated]

Peter - as to "mutual mistake," it's not my area of the law.
So I'll defer -- happily. ....that's why I wrote preliminary without having researched ...etc... My bad.
....
----
By the way does the "TPG dodge" you describe ultimately mean that to have warranty relief the card has to go back to the person who was the original seller (presumably whomever submitted the card to the TPG) who could properly bring it to the TPG for the warranty ...
BUT then the TPG could assert that this person violated the submission terms by acting in bad faith and knowingly submitted a doctored card. So the TPG could then avoid its obligations under the warranty altogether. Pretty crafty.

(sorry if this is clumsy but it's Saturday)

[ejharrington]

No way

[griffon512]

i don't think you can look at the ethical responsibilities of the seller on a standalone basis. there are ethical considerations for the buyer too. the buyer should be taking reasonable steps to do their own due diligence and understand the risks of relying on a third party service if that factor weighed heavily in a purchase. it is not the sellers ethical obligation to inform the buyer of these risks in these instances in my view.

time passage is also an important factor. there is a big difference between a transaction between rescinded the same day versus after an extended period of time. in the latter case, the seller will not know if the purchase was made as a resale opportunity that did not work out. aside from that, there are valid reasons refunds have a time limitation across all businesses.

with all of that said, the people i interact with most in the hobby try to do the "right" thing for the buyer and seller where "right" has little to do with legal obligation.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by griffon512

i don't think you can look at the ethical responsibilities of the seller on a standalone basis. there are ethical considerations for the buyer too. the buyer should be taking reasonable steps to do their own due diligence and understand the risks of relying on a third party service if that factor weighed heavily in a purchase. it is not the sellers ethical obligation to inform the buyer of these risks in these instances in my view.

This is an excellent point. The seller has a responsibility to stand behind the product they sell, but there is also an onus on the buyer to do their homework.

When I was starting to buy vintage and especially pre-war cards, the later of which I had very little knowledge of at the time, if I decided to buy a card slabbed by a tpg, I did much more than simply look at the grade of the card, the card's centering and overall visual aesthetic. I was looking at the slab, itself, searching for signs of tampering. I looked at the card, with the highest resolution possible, searching for things like uneven/wavy edges that would indicate trimming. I did whatever possible to look into the history of the seller, both here, and, if listed, their Ebay store. I asked questions, building a rapport with the member. I'd ask about the history of the card. And once I had the card in hand, I grabbed my loupe, and examined the card under natural, LED and black light.

As a proactive, informed buyer, I cannot completely eliminate risk, but I can do things to dramatically reduce the likelihood that I'll be searching through a spreadsheet of certification numbers. If it's determined that one of the cards I've purchased has been altered, I'll speak with the seller, but I'll also accept a certain amount of responsibility.

Here is the problem, though. Not everybody buying cards has the knowledge our forum members have. They'll see the card graded, and pay a premium price for a card they feel has received an unimpeachable opinion. What if a young kid is collecting cards, and Grandma or Grandpa decides to get their grandson a baseball card for a birthday or Christmas gift? They won't have any clue that there are issues with TPGs, with card doctors. They'll be completely oblivious to the fraud within the hobby. The kid certainly won't know, either, and that card will sit in their collection for years before they stumble across an old article here, or on Blowout. By then, it's too late.

[drcy]

A related example is if, after the sale new information is discovered about the card, that wasn't known nat the time. For example, if a few years after the sale, hobby historians deduce or learn that a card considered and cataloged as being from 1920 was actually made in 1928. Something perhaps relevant for rookie card collectors-- that rookie card may no longer be a rookie card.

I don't believe the seller should be considered responsible for this, even though the card was misdated at the time of sale.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Misunderestimated

Peter - as to "mutual mistake," it's not my area of the law.
So I'll defer -- happily. ....that's why I wrote preliminary without having researched ...etc... My bad.
....
----
By the way does the "TPG dodge" you describe ultimately mean that to have warranty relief the card has to go back to the person who was the original seller (presumably whomever submitted the card to the TPG) who could properly bring it to the TPG for the warranty ...
BUT then the TPG could assert that this person violated the submission terms by acting in bad faith and knowingly submitted a doctored card. So the TPG could then avoid its obligations under the warranty altogether. Pretty crafty.

(sorry if this is clumsy but it's Saturday)

Leaving aside the Sloan letter, I think the guarantee applies broadly to any purchaser of the card in the current holder. I don't think there is any obligation to go back to the seller to invoke the guarantee.

[Prof_Plum]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Leaving aside the Sloan letter, I think the guarantee applies broadly to any purchaser of the card in the current holder. I don't think there is any obligation to go back to the seller to invoke the guarantee.

So I'm the seller and I've learned my TPG 3 was trimmed. I bought it last year for $100. I can either go to the TPG to get reimbursed for the $100 or.... "sell" it (wink wink) to a friend for $500 and have my friend go get reimbursed for $500.

[Johnny630]

When the smoke all clears We will hear the same thing from fellow collectors and dealer a like Buyer Beware Be Careful Who You Buy From

If the past is any indication of the future this is what most likely will happen...
That’s it, end of the story. No one will take accountability, responsibility, liability, or be held criminally Responsible......

The beat continues to go on. The Crowds at the Nationals will be larger then ever and will happily be giving their money and cards to PSA and PWCC

Why are we spinning our wheels here we all know what the outcome will be.......it’s sad

[Leon]

You should ask PWCC, PSA or Gary Moser if we are spinning our wheels? My guess is, they don't think so.

As to the question, I think the TPG bears the brunt because they are taking your money and supposedly giving you good information and a sellable product. That said, I have always tried to make the buyer of my cards whole or good. I have taken back a card after 2 yrs before because the collector didn't realize it was someone else on the card.

Originally Posted by Johnny630

When the smoke all clears We will hear the same thing from fellow collectors and dealer a like Buyer Beware Be Careful Who You Buy From

If the past is any indication of the future this is what most likely will happen...
That’s it, end of the story. No one will take accountability, responsibility, liability, or be held criminally Responsible......

The beat continues to go on. The Crowds at the Nationals will be larger then ever and will happily be giving their money and cards to PSA and PWCC

Why are we spinning our wheels here we all know what the outcome will be.......it’s sad

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Prof_Plum

So I'm the seller and I've learned my TPG 3 was trimmed. I bought it last year for $100. I can either go to the TPG to get reimbursed for the $100 or.... "sell" it (wink wink) to a friend for $500 and have my friend go get reimbursed for $500.

No it gets reimbursed according to the guarantee for current market value not purchase price.

[Buythatcard]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No it gets reimbursed according to the guarantee for current market value not purchase price.

How do they determine current market value? Do they include all the doctored cards which have inflated the price? Do they include all the shilled cards? Or do they just come up with their own market value?