PSA Card Guarantee

[benjulmag]

Presumably the instance in which someone would have the economic incentive to bring an action is when he cannot sell it for a profit. Granted that day may never come because the current market does not seem to care that cards that are selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars are in reality worth a fraction of that, but it still blows my mind that people do that. As was noted by one of the posters in the blowout thread, that person is very distraught that his mint card is altered, and likely will view graded cards differently going forward.

And too I would think that even if it required at some point taking the card out of the holder to do the forensic examination, which I'm not sure is required in all instances, once that was done and the card was shown to be a fake, any trier of fact would look at PSA's expert in a different light. I don't think juries like it when people get screwed and believe it was done in bad faith. And too, I'm not sure how well it will be received by a court that the only way I could mitigate my damages is by withholding material information from the person I would be selling it to.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Presumably the instance in which someone would have the economic incentive to bring an action is when he cannot sell it for a profit. Granted that day may never come because the current market does not seem to care that cards that are selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars are in reality worth a fraction of that, but it still blows my mind that people do that. As was noted by one of the posters in the blowout thread, that person is very distraught that his mint card is altered, and likely will view graded cards differently going forward.

And too I would think that even if it required at some point taking the card out of the thread to do the forensic examination, which I'm not sure is required in all instances, once that was done and the card was shown to be a fake, any trier of fact would look at PSA's expert in a different light. I don't think juries like it when people get screwed and believe it was done in bad faith. And too, I'm not sure how well it will be received by a court that the only way I could mitigate my damages is by withholding material information from the person I would be selling it to.

IMO you could probably disclose it in most cases and do just fine. You and I are from the generation where it mattered, but I don't think it does any more to a huge swath of the hoibby.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

IMO you could probably disclose it in most cases and do just fine. You and I are from the generation where it mattered, but I don't think it does any more to a huge swath of the hoibby.

Nailed it

[JeremyW]

"How do you forensically prove anything with the card in a holder?"

They do it all the time at Blowout. Obvious trims & recoloring. Is that not forensic?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

"How do you forensically prove anything with the card in a holder?"

They do it all the time at Blowout. Obvious trims & recoloring. Is that not forensic?

In a trial, who is the collector going to call as a witness, an anonymous poster from BODA? In court it has to be done under strict rules of evidence. Different animal altogether. You could try it through an expert I suppose. In my opinion this card is the same card as the card in this online photo which I've never seen, and it appears to have been trimmed after that photo was taken. Good luck with that.

[JeremyW]

The photo evidence is so obvious. Does it take a jury to confirm?

[JeremyW]

I'm guessing a jury would confirm within an hour.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JeremyW

The photo evidence is so obvious. Does it take a jury to confirm?

I am not sure I follow the question? Are you asking whether a judge would find for the collector on a motion for summary judgment? I can't imagine that would be the case. You would also need to think about how you even get the photos into evidence. They aren't "self authenticating."

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In a trial, who is the collector going to call as a witness, an anonymous poster from BODA? In court it has to be done under strict rules of evidence. Different animal altogether. You could try it through an expert I suppose. In my opinion this card is the same card as the card in this online photo which I've never seen, and it appears to have been trimmed after that photo was taken. Good luck with that.

Is there a good explanation of those rules that a non lawyer can easily understand?

To me, I'm thinking you'd have provenance on an earlier image. And for some, fairly clear identifiers.
Like
This card with PSA serial number X was shown in this image when it was offered on x date by this particular seller.
Theres a unique wood fiber inclusion visible just here further identifying the card.
That image is X dpi, making that fiber x distance from the nearest edge


This image is a new image created on x date, and at the same dpi as the original. Note the unique fiber inclusion is now Y distance from the nearest edge.

This is the actual card, as shown.

That could be done for all edges and overall size.

Would it not be allowed?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Is there a good explanation of those rules that a non lawyer can easily understand?

To me, I'm thinking you'd have provenance on an earlier image. And for some, fairly clear identifiers.
Like
This card with PSA serial number X was shown in this image when it was offered on x date by this particular seller.
Theres a unique wood fiber inclusion visible just here further identifying the card.
That image is X dpi, making that fiber x distance from the nearest edge


This image is a new image created on x date, and at the same dpi as the original. Note the unique fiber inclusion is now Y distance from the nearest edge.

This is the actual card, as shown.

That could be done for all edges and overall size.

Would it not be allowed?

I assume you would have an expert witness try to do all this. Who would that be? If so, here are the applicable standards at least in a federal court:

Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:

(a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;

(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;

(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and

(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

One issue I see right away is (c), because comparison with prior photos is not how anyone in the industry authenticates cards. So you would have an initial substantial hurdle of trying to persuade a judge that this new method was reliable.