Thread: My coin got killed!

Originally Posted by pennsteve

It looks like they sent you back the wrong coin. Perhaps they had more than 1 wam to grade and somehow got them mixed up? Maybe start going to all of the coin forums and watch for a post where someone says something like "wow! my coin came back in better condition than when I sent it in!"

I don't think that a switch is a possibility. Here are both obv and rev of the one I sent in and next to the one they sent back. I am looking at the spots on the coin that I id'd that I was hoping the conserving would improve, but it looks like even if dipping the coin caused the spots to run, they can't have run in the way they did. So I have no clue as to what was done to the coin to make it that way. There is nothing on the obverse near Trust that would do that, IMO.

Both sides do show they are the same coin, IMO. Look at the spot on Lincoln's shoulder and the two nicks that are on mine: at the collar (horizontally) and to the right of Lincoln's suit (diagonally). Also on the reverse, it is apparent the way the spots on the AMER, especially between the A and M the way the spot curves, do remain the same. There is also a spot between the N and T in Cent, which is the same.

So the conclusion is that they have significantly changed the appearance of this coin, in a manner that is unacceptable. They have created spots that come from nowhere and run and drip in horrid ways, and have taken away much of the "red" surface and made it "brown".

I sent an email via their Contact Us area on the site, indicating I would be contacting them via phone, as well as referencing this thread so that they know what I'm talking about. I really hope I don't get the run-around when I call or have to play phone-tag.

Originally Posted by jloring

Seems that way, if eBay is any indication. Had the coin come in a 63, probably looking at $500 plus. At least that's what they're being listed for.

I sent it in as value of 250.00 simply because I am a novice at grading, and I was concerned they would grade it lower than what the value would be if it was a MS63, although I had indications that that might be the grade. I had figured that MS65 was about a 550.00 value, with MS63 being maybe 350.00. I was trying to be conservative. Right now, as a MS61, with the problems this coin now has, I have no idea what it would bring, but I think that some would be really hesitant to add this to their collection. I hoped to be able to sell it at some point in the future, and slabbing it was a way to ensure that it was verified as well as graded by a respectable tpg.

Originally Posted by pennsteve

It looks like they sent you back the wrong coin. Perhaps they had more than 1 wam to grade and somehow got them mixed up? Maybe start going to all of the coin forums and watch for a post where someone says something like "wow! my coin came back in better condition than when I sent it in!"

Unfortunately it is the same coin, The nicks and dings match up.

They should have manned up, admitted the mess they created and made it right with a check. But NOOOO, they slabbed it. What a disgrace. The only slab that coin belongs in is Details, Improper cleaning.



Kasia,

I feel for you.

Mike

Originally Posted by Kasia

So the conclusion is that they have significantly changed the appearance of this coin, in a manner that is unacceptable. They have created spots that come from nowhere and run and drip in horrid ways, and have taken away much of the "red" surface and made it "brown"

I am sorry, Kasia. I really am, but from what I can see in your before images, there was no reason to send the coin to NCS. Copper (composition noted) is a very reactive metal and NCS could never guarantee the outcome of conservation. In my opinion they should have denied your submission on the basis it was not necessary, but the fact remains that you submitted the coin and should have understood the risks involved.

NCS clearly states the following on their website;

"NCS is not responsible for any loss of value or marketability of the coin resulting from any service performed. NCS does insure your coin against mishandling or loss while on our premises."

If it can be proven the coin was damaged, you may have some recourse. Unfortunately, with the images provided I think you may have a difficult time making a case for this. NGC has a superb customer service department who will do their best to assist you. I am sorry if this sounds harsh and especially for the letdown you are experiencing.

Sure looks "mis-handled" to me. Sorry Kasia. This really sucks.

It would be interesting to see the technician who did this.

I am sure also that it is the same coin. The only possible way I can see the result happening is if there was a "treatment" on the coin hiding the underlying problem when you purchased/found it. Colored wax and other substances have been used in the past, and solvents usually remove them. I don't know if this is what happened or not, but most "cleaning/conservation methods tend to remove such toning/spot marks rather than intensify/enlarge them.
Jim

Originally Posted by mikem2000

Unfortunately it is the same coin, The nicks and dings match up.

They should have manned up, admitted the mess they created and made it right with a check. But NOOOO, they slabbed it. What a disgrace. The only slab that coin belongs in is Details, Improper cleaning.



Kasia,

I feel for you.

Mike

I was thinking that too. Ignoring the NCS part, having this coin in an NGC slab has to be a black eye to that service. Is sure doesn't make their slabs look very good to have an obviously scratched and scrubbed coin in a non-details holder.

Well, I certainly understand that they cannot guarantee that all results will be favorable. However, and this is my opinion, they never guaranteed that they would conserve the coin in the first place.

In fact, they said that if NCS felt that it was best left unconserved (as in not cleaned/conserved), then they would leave it that way. The only difference is that I would have paid less to them to evaluate it and not conserve it that I did by having them "professionally conserve it" like they did. They tout that "The expertise of NCS technicians has long been needed in numismatics. Not to be confused with undesirable cleaning, proper numismatic conservation involves examination, scientific analysis and a reliance upon an extensive base of numismatic knowledge to determine the nature of a coin’s state of preservation and the extent of any damage. NCS is uniquely qualified to meet the conservation needs of the hobby." I would say that in this case, they did an undesirable cleaning.


Yes, I had the option of not having it at NCS, and yes, I understood there could be a risk. I, however, was unprepared for the extent of the risk that NCS did, considering that the company stresses how their conservation is based on how initially "The conservation process begins with an evaluation. This is just as important as the actual conservation treatment, since choosing the appropriate treatment requires knowledge of the materials used to create coins and the contaminants that may affect them. Evaluators examine each coin in detail to determine what, if any, conservation should be undertaken.Using state of the art techniques, along with decades of knowledge and experience, NCS experts can conserve your coins professionally and responsibly."



They also state "Evaluation is the first step in the conservation process. During the evaluation process, a determination is made as to what, if any, conservation will be undertaken. "

And "Appropriate conservation work is performed. "

I'd say that inappropriate conservation work was performed in this case. Which is why I am disappointed.


But I appreciate your comments, BooksB4Coins

I am sorry if this sounds harsh and especially for the letdown you are experiencing.

Pretty everyone here on this forum knows I can be harsh with others, so if someone is harsh with me, I can take it. But I will fight on this one, because it seems to me that this was an unnecessary result, and one that perhaps could be viewed as simply an example that maybe they don't evaluate as to whether a coin should be conserved, but rather that they will "conserve" any coin they get and live with the fact that some will be damaged, and the heck with the owners of those coins. You have to remember that they charge for the examination (1% of the coins declared value), so they are putting their reputation up anytime they do decide to conserve.

But, hopefully, I will be able to talk to them tomorrow and resolve it satisfactorily.

Originally Posted by desertgem

I am sure also that it is the same coin. The only possible way I can see the result happening is if there was a "treatment" on the coin hiding the underlying problem when you purchased/found it. Colored wax and other substances have been used in the past, and solvents usually remove them. I don't know if this is what happened or not, but most "cleaning/conservation methods tend to remove such toning/spot marks rather than intensify/enlarge them.
Jim

I thought that too Jim, and that would be a likely answer for an older coin. Why would a circulation find be doctored like that though? That part doesn't make any sense.

Originally Posted by medoraman

I was thinking that too. Ignoring the NCS part, having this coin in an NGC slab has to be a black eye to that service. Is sure doesn't make their slabs look very good to have an obviously scratched and scrubbed coin in a non-details holder.

Thanks, that is indeed a strange thing. I just can't imagine that if the coin had been sent in by me doing that cleaning that NGC would have graded the coin with no issues rather than putting it in a details - improper cleaning slab. In fact, that coin would never have been sent in for grading if it had been like that in the first place. It was only the realization that it was a MS coin that had overall good looks that I made the decision to send it in, based on what the value should be for a MS62 or 63 coin.

I hope it's not an everyday issue that when coins go through NCS first and have the conservation, that NGC then excuses an improper cleaning and grades it as if it was conserved properly.

I have a bit of info. here that may help some of you with these copper plated cent coins. If you find a coin that is dirty looking and a few thin looking spots you can make it look brand new again without hurting the coin by using a chemical called Tarn-X . if the coin still has all of the original mint luster you can take a q-tip and soak it really good with this and dab it on the coin without rubbing it or simply just dip your coin in it and then rinse it off with water, then find a dry soft cloth and dry the coin off by just pressing the cloth to the coin. first find some coins to experiment with until you can get it right.

I have did this to coins that looked absolutely horrible and they have come out looking mint condition and they still look good after a few years. don't do this on coins that have the mint luster wore off because it will make them look cleaned and horrible looking.

this method is also perfect for our clad coins to remove tarnish and ugly toned spots.

that coin that Kasia had I could have had it looking perfect in just a few seconds and it would have not looked to have been cleaned. please if you try this do some experiments first and see if you like it and learn from practice.

Dang Kasia, I'm sorry this is happening to you. What were they thinking when they were evaluating this coin for conservation? They should have advised you to just leave it be. The coin in it's original state looks better than, for lack of a better word, the aftermath. I agree with Mikem2000. That coin has been improperly cleaned.

Thanks, rascal, and green18, mike, and all the others. I appreciate your kindnesses in conveying your sympathy.

It didn't take too long for this thread to hit two pages. Before I read all the posts, I tried to match the unique marks on the original with the "conserved" coin and found, as the others did, that it is the same coin. What a shame that they'd leave it such a mess. Their work surely did more harm than good; and certainly makes me shy away from their services in the future.
As far as NGC slabbing as MS61, it's my understanding that the graders aren't even notified that the coin came over from NCS to try to remove any perceived bias.
Boy that coin is the pitts :|