I think I got swindled

Just for curiousity, where does this logic end guys? What if he had found a rim imperfection when he deslabbed it? Do you still say once the holder is opened you own it? A friend once removed a coin from a 2x2, and only then did he see the damage. Was he wrong to wish to return it?

What if kirkuleez was happy with this coin, but upon removal from the holder then saw it was not proof nor ms66. Is he not then entitled to still return a not as advertised coin?

I simply do not believe beating him up over this is warranted, nor he is totally wrong.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't understand why it had to come out of the slab to see the breaks in luster.
Hope no prints or damage because of the change of holder.

 

I hate that I respect you guys so much.

 

Chris, you have to respect the wishes of the seller. If he didn't grant sanction to crack the coin out then it must be returned. If one has doubts regarding the purchase then they're still obligated to play by the rules of the seller. The seller granted no quarter in this matter.......

 

He needed to see the rims of the coin I assume, ldhair. Once he did the fact that it was a business strike was likely obvious.

That's the problem, medora. He wasn't happy with the coin. He questioned it. Hence this thread. He was offered a return and refund provided that he didn't crack the coin out. He then cracked the coin out to confirm his suspicions and wanted to re-seal the slab and perpetrate a fraud upon the seller and return it. Where is this unclear?

I agree that beating him up is unnecessary, I merely stated the truth about what happened and if you review what I said I kept my comments to his actions and not kirk personally.

I stand by what I said.

 

After thinking about it for a while, I agree with you Mike. That is why I decided to keep it. It is nicer than the one my son has anyway and it will go in his Dansco just as soon as a get it back out of the slab.

I could not see any breaks in luster in the slab, but it was pretty obvious once it was out.

 

a much more equitable solution, IMHO and good for your son.

I am sorry that you got taken.

 

I'm sure that it won't be the last time that I loose in a deal, but I can cross that seller/grading service off of my list of dealers.

At least it is a decent looking coin, I just paid twice what it was worth. Chalk it up to my continuing education I guess.

 

Glad it worked out , now your son has a better V nickel then I .

 

Little late to the party, but if the coin was sold as a proof and was in fact clearly a business strike I would return it. Regardless of if you cracked it out, the coin they sold was misrepresented. This is not a case of cracking a coin out and getting buyers remorse. You bought a proof, and if the only way to determine the accuracy of that claim was to crack it out and check the rims then so be it. The seller should have done his due diligence as well so as to not misrepresent what he sold.

 

First things first. The OP bought the coin not a slab. What slab was it in? If it wasn't in a slab accepted by ebay new rules selling COINS on this, there should of not been a number grade given. The auction is not real. All bets are off and ebay and paypal would of sided with the buyer. JMHO. G

 

I get a warm, fuzzy feeling inside when I read comments like these. It's telling me that I should be thankful that I'm not a seller on eBay.

Chris

 

At least your son gets an upgrade! Imagine, "Hey son, look what your old man got you!"



"Gee thanks Dad!"

Maybe consider telling the seller what you did and see what they say. Maybe they'd rather have it back and try to reslab & sell it.

 

If you are the type of person who would misrepresent a coin as a proof when it is a business strike, then I get that same warm and fuzzy knowing you don't sell on ebay.

 

This was an interesting thread to read. Thanks, Kiruleez! I went to the seller's page where he sold it to you, and the main downfall of the seller is that he did in fact in the title list it as a proof. He also clearly showed the holder and the coin. The cheap slab said it was a PR-65. Also in his description he clearly states (my italics, underlining, and color):
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"RETURN POLICY: Your satisfaction is guaranteed! IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON YOUR PURCHASE OR WISH TO RETURN IT, PLEASE CONTACT US BEFORE OPENING A DISPUTE,THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. WHEN WE RECEIVE ANY RETURNS WE WILL ISSUE A FULL REFUND FOR ANY REASON AS LONG AS IT IS IN THE ORIGINAL HOLDER AND YOU NOTIFY US AND SHIP IT WITHIN 14 DAYS.Removing coin from holder you receive it in voids return privilege. We sell certified coins as a finished product. If you feel you are an expert and your coin will grade higher or cross over in a different service you are doing so at your own risk. "[/FONT]

So if you read the description, you can see he's selling the bargain slabbed product, but trying to do so within the confines of ebay where he can't put the grade up. But he still is selling "certified coins as a finished product".

I think that Kirkluleez should have kept his mouth shut about this (over the internet) and popped the coin out to ensure it was a proof (by the edges and being able to look at the luster in hand). Finding it wasn't would then be a SNAD. And he should have filed one. It wouldn't matter at that point if the coin was out of the slab, as the seller was selling it as one thing when it wasn't. Then, if the seller didn't want the coin back, chances are the OP would have gotten his money back plus the coin.

Kirk....you did this all wrong.... you got on your high horse and rode it into the internet sunset, proclaiming all the way what you "really wanted" in finding this out. Instead you got reamed by some and put yourself in a position where you did something wrong. You need to learn, kid! Never proclaim yourself the innocent when you are clearly sneaky in your own way and expect others to congratulate you for it.

 

Fair enough Kasia.

My main problem with this whole thing is the seller knows he is being misleading. He KNOWS there are things a numismatist cannot easily prove while the coin is in the slab.

I am simply trying to see where you guys draw the line in the sand you believe Kirk crossed. Was it because he had doubts about the coin before he cracked it?

This is how I view it. The seller knows full well he cannot sell garbage slabs on Ebay. He is sneaky and gets around those rules. Now he sells a lightly circulated business strike as a proof. Problem is, sometimes light circulation cannot be seen inside a slab. Second problem is like Mike said you need to see the rims sometimes to determine if its a proof or not. BUT, the seller explicitly says you cannot crack open the cheap slab. Who is being underhanded here? In my view the seller knows EXACTLY what he is doing, and is being underhanded by trying to force the buyers to be unable to catch him. If they do crack open the slab to find out his lies, he just voided any return privileges.

In my view this is EXACTLY like hidden damage. If I get a coin in a 2x2 from a dealer who says I cannot return it if I take it out of the 2x2, yet when I do take it out I find rim damage, I do not CARE what the dealer says, its going back. A dealer cannot misrepresent goods and then hide behind his return privileges disclamier. The fact the dealer, in my mind, KNEW he was selling overgraded and misrepresented goods completely overrides what his return privileges say.

The only thing that would make sense to me why good people like Mike and Ken would be objecting is the fact Kirk had doubts before hand. Is that the hangup? What if he was not sure? If he didn't know, and THEN cracked open the slab and found out it wasn't proof, would you then agree he should return it?

Myself? The seller would have a SNAD case opened and receive the coin and the shattered remains of his lying slab in the mail. I have zero tolerance for dealers who sell misrepresented coins. They are a dealer, they are supposed to know what they are doing. If this dealer did know what he was doing, then he is a thief.

 

Exactly, what the seller did was fraud and as such his return policy is meaningless. Regardless of if you keep the coin, I would still open a case with ebay as I am sure they would want to know about it.

I do agree with other posters that reslabbing it, or re-sealing the original slab, and sending it back is underhanded and also wrong. I would not do it, I would ask the seller for a refund, and if they balked I would contact ebay. If the seller accepts the refund I would still leave negative feedback.

 

This has been a great read. I think my opinions are a little different from the majority. Let me make an assumption first...as I have never bought a coin in one of these "bargain" slabs. I assume these slabs can be opened and resealed fairly easy and that if the buyer chose could reassemble it and return it without the seller knowing any different.

Based on my assumption above, I would return this coin despite what the seller said. Here is why...the coin was misrepresented. Per eBay requirements, these slabs cannot really be sold as "slabbed" coins...so one should consider them raw. If the issue was over the grade, I would say you should have known better. However, the coin was represented as a proof and it was determined not to be a proof. The only way to verify that was open the slab. If a buy a raw proof and I get a business strike...I should be able to confirm that and return the coin.

Since the slab can be resealed and returned to the seller in the EXACT same condition that it was received in...then there should be no issue there. Again, if this was an issue of buyers remorse then I would feel differently. For example, had the coin been a proof when it was cracked out but still had those luster breaks...making a PF55 I would say you need to keep it. But, the coin was not a proof and therefore should be allowed to be returned...even if the seller didn't want it cracked out. Just my opinion though.

 

My V-nickels are in a SDB but I have a photographic inventory of the coins in the SDBs. Sorry for the crummy photo quality. I had taken something like 200 photos an hour so the photos were not intended to be charming.

I found two photos depicting 1886 proof nickels with poorly struck stars. You can certainly have poorly struck stars on a proof manufacture V-nickel. Sorry, I did not locate the one nickel dated 1884 with poorly struck stars. [However, one of my 1884 nickels has a really cool re-punched date].

 

Here is the second proof coin with flat stars.