According to their website, PCGS designates more "cleaned" coins than any other problem. I know for me, I've spent up to 6 or 7 minutes studying coins under different lighting and angles and have seen no evidence of a past cleaning, yet all too often I get one or two coins in my submissions deemed "cleaned." I've even sent coins in multiple times that are detailed the 1st or 2nd time, then they come back problem free. One was an AU58 Bust Half. I've even heard of coins in mint cello coming back as cleaned (second hand info)! So do they work from a position of fear? How can we study coins for lengthy periods of time, and yet they spend 8-20 seconds on them and call then cleaned? Do they give up verifying their suspicion in order to move on to the next coin and just use it as a catch-all? Just wondering your thoughts/experiences.
Just like there are gray areas between each grade, there are gray areas between problem-free and problem coins, and this gray area has lots of coins that could and do go either way with respect to being cleaned.
Maybe they see more of them than we do and they can "just tell" after the 500th specimen. I assume that, especially with a guarantee hanging in the balance, it's easier to deem a coin "cleaned" than risk passing a questionable one through with a straight grade. When in doubt, why risk it? After all, maybe it will be cracked out and sent back again and again so additional fees can be collected?
@GDJMSP Would say that they already have certified millions of cleaned coins. But to clarify, I'm not talking about "properly cleaned" coins that make it through. I'm talking about coins that we find zero evidence of improper or harsh cleaning that get slabbed as " details cleaning."
They'll do it without hairlines visible, based off the look. Pretty much this. They really catch more than we do, a lot of times its just is it okay or not for what it is.
With proper training, they can indeed catch cleaning in just a few seconds that most might take minutes or even require the guidance of another to detect. Still, I agree that there are some instances where they appear to offer a bit of forgiveness.
I just had a Lincoln 1909 S/S woodie that they say was cleaned. I looked at all of the coins that I sent in as a crossover, I saw no evidence of cleaning, PCGS claimed it was cleaned. Sometimes I think they just want people to re-send to generate more revenue. For now it will stay in the ANACS AU55 holder.
Just like there are gray areas between each grade, there are gray areas between problem-free and problem coins, and this gray area has lots of coins that could and do go either way with respect to being cleaned.
You can usually tell by the color whether or not something is cleaned. This includes dipping as well. Coins from 1866 and prior usually get more leeway for cleanings, at least from what I have observed with slabs. Copper is almost always designated as cleaned if it has been.
This is a common occurrence. This is also a common occurrence. Perhaps less common than the two above, but one that has been going on for as long as I can remember. In a way it's already been said by others, but I'd say that answer boils to one word - experience. As I have said many times, learning how to correctly identify harshly cleaned coins is one of the most difficult things there is to learn in numismatics. This is because there are so many different ways that a coin can be harshly cleaned, and each one has a very different look. And that look can be further complicated by which type of coin it is, as well as the amount of underlying detail remaining on the coin. Combine all those things and there is an overwhelming amount you need to know. And if you don't know it, well, you're not going to see it - no matter how hard you look. I think most here have heard it said that the best way to learn about coins is to look at many, many examples of them. And that same axiom applies here as well. Take any coin type, and I use type in the standard definition as it applies to coins, and the best way to be able to correctly identify a harshly cleaned example is to know what an example, in a given grade, that has not been harshly cleaned looks like. Once you have that familiarity, that degree of experience, a harshly cleaned example almost seems to jump up and slap you in the face at a glance. Kinda sorta but not really. As another member said above, when the suspicion exist, caution is the best course of action for them. It's not that they are giving up just so they can move on, it's that they see something is wrong, something is just not right. As I mentioned above, harshly cleaned coins can have many different looks, and a lot of the time that look is all you have to go by. Based on everything I've read on various coin forums over the last 20 plus years a lot of folks seem to think that in order to be considered harshly cleaned that a coin is going to be covered with hairlines and or fine scratches. But that is not the case at all. As a matter of fact a coin can have a lot of hairlines and fine scratches and yet not have been harshly cleaned. And it is up to you to be able to tell the difference between the two. And the only way one can do that is by having the necessary experience. And then you have to consider that things are complicated even more by the history of it all and by changes in standards. And I don't mean changes in grading, but changes in what is considered harsh cleaning, and what is not. For example, years ago if a coin had a single wipe mark it was considered to have been harshly cleaned - as it should have been. In today's world that's no longer the case. Today they base their rulings on a matter of degree with many coins - this much harsh cleaning is OK and that much is not. And to make it even worse the older the coin is, or the more scarce it is, or the more it cost, or what pedigree it has, the more leniency they are going to apply. So it's no wonder that people are confused. They have all these coins in older slabs to look at that were graded under old standards, and then all these coins in newer slabs that were graded under newer standards - and when you compare the two there is no comparison. It's like you are looking at two different things, and in point of fact you are looking at two different things. But if you don't already know that you're going to wonder why nothing seems to make sense and end up sitting there scratching your head. What it boils down to is this, there are rules as to what defines harsh cleaning, and those rules are complicated by the time factor. But - sometimes the rules are thrown out the window. At least when it comes to the TPGs.
Their decision may be based on more than the usual visual exam. In some cases, they may be using the "sniffer" or UV light to detect residue of cleaning chemicals. I've heard these are used mostly to detect PVC residue, doctoring or fakes, but they could detect cleaning in some cases. Cal