SEGS NOT HONORING GUARANTEE

This from the individual who decided to take one small piece of a much larger post and spin it into something that clearly wasn't said? All this in on you, buddy, not me. This is how many times now since joining you've either placed words into my mouth or accused me of saying something I didn't?

Again, is it really that hard to understand that standing behind a guarantee does NOT mean standing behind the price paid by someone who may or may not know what they're doing? I've already said this (follow your own advice, sir; read) but if the coin, 1910 $10 SEGS66 is "worth" the $5k paid, from repeated sales results, then yes... Mr. Briggs indeed needs to cough up that amount OR pay the difference between 66 and 64. This is very, very simple. What he does not need to do is pay her $5k based solely upon the fact that is what she CHOSE to pay. No reasonable individual is going to believe any entity would "guarantee" a fool and their money; people overpay every day, and if (IF) this is the case here, it's not on Briggs to pay for her mistake, but ONLY for the realistic value of the coin. Again, very simple common sense.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You are correct about my assumptions and that the piercing of a corporate veil requires a high bar and very specific requirements. Obviously, I would investigate the facts surrounding the underlying change in corporate structure before taking more aggressive measures.

With this said, if this is simply a case of Briggs buying an insolvent company and using the equipment and name to start his own separate grading service through the LLC, then it would seem that Briggs would have stated as much. When Briggs simply cites a change in corporate structure, it creates the appearance that he has done so to avoid liability. This is further reinforced when he tries to use PCGS's retroactive amendment of its guarantee (claiming that even copper coins are no longer covered for authenticity or grade with PCGS and this was not a copper color dispute) to support his position that he has no liability, it creates the impression that he is merely trying to avoid liability all together. If there are relevant facts, then I would welcome him to provide documentation to support his claim. This is why I said that I intended to communicate with him first.

With this said, I cannot necessarily agree that the LLC is completely absolved of liability when it actually cracks open the pre-existing slab with knowledge that it will not honor a guarantee. The old SEGS slab (and all that entails for slab collectors and there are a small dedicated group of die hard SEGS fans) was my property and by removing it from its original holder to downgrade it without permission, he arguably changed it and caused a possible loss of value. I haven't thought through all of the logical implications yet, but it is also interesting that the SEGS guarantee on its website is silent about pre-2007 coins without qualification, and if someone purchased a coin relying on his statements that it applies to all SEGS coins if this might impute some liability. In case you are wondering, I think it was in the same style holder and label as the alleged pre-2007 coin.

Edited to add: This really isn't about money, and it was not my intention to profit from him - this was more of an issue of principle. It irks me when I see a TPG seek to evade guarantee without providing enough facts to provide a sound basis for doing so. As this happens more and more, it will only lead to greater abuses. If there is a simple explanation as you state, Briggs should come forward and state as much. It should also be listed on his site.

 

I spoke with an attorney friend who I often play golf with. Without having the documents, he speculated -- as many if us have on this thread -- that the guarantee did not transfer from the corporation to the LLC. Dirty pool? Perhaps. Legal? Probably so. Any recourse for someone making a claim on the guarantee? Probably not.

That, by the way, cost me a shot per nine in our next friendly match.

 

Yes, but that being the case, SEGS is advertising regrade service with a guarantee. While they can get away with not honoring the guarantee, is offering this service without a disclaimer not fraud? What about liability for then cracking out the coin from its old holder under fraudulent pretenses? SEGS may be liable for the decreased value of the merchandise due to cracking it out even if they are not liable for enforcing the guarantee.

 

SEGS LLC is offering a regrade service for SEGS LLC original grades. To quote my friend, one should consider the original corporation not to have ever existed, at least from a legal liability standpoint, and its work not to be guaranteed since the corporation no longer exists.

 

Generally yes, but generally a company puts up specific disclaimers stating that often numerous times. In this case we have the same person at the head and their own website guarantee page specifically states "All SEGS Coins Are Guaranteed" in bold letters just like that. There is no mention of LLC anywhere on the page and they specifically state all. Their best defense is almost sorry we lied when their own page is almost waiving the LLC protection with its proclamations. Being the same person further complicates it as they had full control to make any changes necessary to make it clear and failed to do so. Every other TPG ANACS included who has gone through several changes lays everything out. A quiet LLC switch may shield them from some angles of legal recourse but they are trying to walk to many tight ropes that I would be some vulnerability exists by not disclosing this upfront.

 

I just can't get over the underhandedness of having a hidden "trap door" for a guarantee that is only revealed when the company disappears through it.

I'll speculate a bit. While the income generated from submissions whose owners took that guarantee at face value (see what I did there) versus the leading TPG's which have exemptions and conditions, I'm thinking that a loss of income due to the loss of confidence in a guarantee may be measurable.

As a collector who has never sent to TPG, a flat rate, unconditional guarantee as SEGS chose to market their service with using their own language, I might have chosen SEGS for my first experience.

I like the conditions up front or I consider it dishonest to say the least.

 

Actually, the guarantee in it's present form was first captured in May 2013, for

https://web.archive.org/web/20130503021950/http://www.segsgrading.com/Content/Guarantee

Prior to that the words are the same, but the website layout differed - AND it was SEGS, Inc.

https://web.archive.org/web/20111223104554/http://www.segsgrading.com/guarantee.html

If you go back to 2007, it was Sovereign Entities Grading Service Inc.

https://web.archive.org/web/20071219121923/http://www.segsgrading.com/

The website transition between Sovereign Entities and SEGS happened between 19Dec2007 and 18Jan2008.
https://web.archive.org/web/20071219121923/http://www.segsgrading.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20080118223044/http://www.segsgrading.com/


The point of this is that there is arguably clear information that the organization that graded the coin in 2007 is not the organization now in business. IF you go looking.

Whether that's sufficient for the courts is an interesting concept. But it won't ever get that far, because $1,000 isn't enough $ to hire a lawyer, let along file a lawsuit.

Unless Ambulance Chasers, LLC wants to make it a class action... maybe the loons who "won" the silver round case might want a piece of this one too???


While I'm skulking, the "so innovative it's protected by a patent" is http://www.google.com/patents/USD423757, which is a DESIGN patent. These are much weaker - http://www.uspto.gov/patents-gettin...ations/design-patent-application-guide#differ:

The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents
In general terms, a "utility patent" protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.​

(FYI - Bonus points for following the utility patent referenced - http://www.google.com/patents/US8661889 - and explaining what it protects)

 

But SEGS, LLC != SEGS, Inc. != Sovereign Entities Grading Service, Inc.

Just all happen to use the same abbreviation...

 

So, has anyone called or email mr. Briggs with a link to this thread yet?

 

As polarized as this thread has become, in his shoes I wouldn't approach it in this venue. Even aside the legal imperative that he not discuss potential litigation publicly. Don't hold your breath, anyone.

 

I won't knock Books.... but I would like to see him post a coin once in a while. Opinions are great, but coins are better.

 

Good for you! Block everyone. Perhaps he'll be as thankful as I am that now I can viciously pick apart posts (unseen ) and not deal with comments.

 

Opinions are great, but as expulsions from another anatomical orifice which virtually all have, the content may be similar.

I believe your visual request has greater merit, as the receiver/observer may then constructively understand/tolerate a portion of the effluent.

JMHO

 

Dave , I know you think you're perfect but don't think for a second the way you post to people isn't condescending . Your need to feel like the most learned man on this forum reeks in at least a third of your posts . Lighten up dude .

 

Good God, this forum is just like my family!!!

 

So you unequivocally endorse his abusive manner? I understand y'all are friends, and I have all the respect in the world for you (even when you mock me like you are here) but he speaks without manners or respect for the human race. It's that simple.

 

Life's too short for aggravation - take the easy way out and BLOCK HIM dude!

 

I've told you before, Dave; if you've something to say to me, SAY IT TO ME instead of dragging others into your crybaby nonsense. If you can't be man enough to do so, please, shut up.

This swill, coming from the guy who has taken it upon himself to send private messages to not only me but at least one other, for the sole purpose of telling us how we need to be just like you, I will take it as a compliment. This between you and I was started not by me, but you, with your mud and inability to accept that others can approach things or feel/see/believe differently than you without being the "problem" or whatever other little jabs or labels you like to throw out. I hate to break it to you, but remember how you bragged on in that PM about how slick you are and how no one realizes how bad you've burned them until too late? Well, you're not as smart as you think, big guy. Just because someone, including the lowly me, doesn't always come back at you it doesn't mean you were so brilliant we didn't notice, nor should I have felt honored that the almighty superman lowered himself to give little lowly me the time of day as you suggested I should (and is why the message wasn't worthy of a response). The fact is, Dave, if I was anywhere near as "vicious" as you claim my mouth would have opened many times before now, and after first few handfuls of your not so sly childish insults. Need I go back and quote all the little schmuckish jabs you've thrown compared to the relative few you've gotten in return? Come on, Mr. Perfect... tell the whole story instead of resorting the mighty mouse "here he comes to save the day" version.

My approach is by design, and comes from many, many years of personally witnessing otherworldly stupid and costly moves some make in this hobby. It certainly doesn't work with everyone (neither does yours) but does with some, and there are posts on this board and messages in my inbox from a few individuals who actually have appreciated the fact my approach is brutally honest. And that's the thing, Dave; I'd rather be honest than the frauds more than a few are here, yet your mouth never seems to open when it comes to them, their misinformation, their blatant attacks on your precious newbies, or straight out lying to the board. Unlike you, I couldn't care less what anyone thinks of me because it's not about me, but the content of what I post, which, unlike you, is always done as if my own money was a stake. You don't have to like or appreciate my contributions here, Dave, but believe it or not some have/do and you should at least have the decency to respect that.

No matter how great your own contributions to this forum are, or how much you kiss up to certain individuals, you're not the perfect specimen or numisgod you seem to think, Dave. You have plenty of attitude, but I suppose it's okay because, well, it's you; after all, as long as you put a cutesy little smiley face at the end, or make a fake apology to the mods, that certainly makes everything okay, right? Before you degrade others, hotshot, take a nice long look in the mirror; again, I didn't start this, you did. Oh, and if you find my direct no-handholding or brown-nosing nature to be "vicious", that's fine; I'll take that any day over being a two-faced hypocrite to his very core.




The rest of you have my apologies....

 

Somebody needs to take this thread out and shoot it. Jeez.