SEGS NOT HONORING GUARANTEE

It is me... What's left of me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And here's living proof, he jumped from a building too ...
We fired him before he jumped, so we got our money ...
http://www.macombdaily.com/article/MD/20070825/NEWS01/308259997

 

Lol word choice. "Living proof"

 

After reading through this subject, isn't the coin value subjective to "what someone is willing to pay." Not set in stone, the OP paid less than the 16k for a MS66, so apparently the coin is worth what she paid. Not what was listed in the price guide, if she wanted a big payday should of just relisted it at MS66 price and not re graded it. By being downgraded to a MS64 the company, in good faith, should of taken the average of the last few(4-5) sales of the MS64 and refunded the difference of what was paid on the coin. Anyway that is all the OP is out. I see others have same opinion and agree that would be fair for both parties.

 

So it appears that SEGS modified the guarantee language on its website to SEGS's advantage. You should keep an archive of the
original guarantee or, in my opinion, it looks like attempted spoliation of evidence. I cannot imagine an attorney advising his client to do so and then post about it online for all to see. This makes it look (in my opinion) like SEGS does not have a valid defense or explanation and that the putative change in corporate structure was nothing more than an attempt to evade creditors.

If there was a valid reason for the rejection of the claims and there was a misunderstanding, SEGS would have come forward at least to the parties disputing the denial of their guarantee claims. Instead, it looks like (in my opinion) it would rather attempt to hide behind its attorneys and website revisions rather than making things right. This is quite revealing in my humble opinion, and I predict SEGS's own actions will hurt its bottom line long term.

For legal purposes, everything in this post is meant as opinion and not fact unless explicitly stated otherwise.

 

How is this relevant to this thread or your claim that a lawsuit against SEGS would entitle SEGS to file a counterclaim?

 

Maybe you should have had an attorney look at your original guarantee before it was placed on your website in the first place Just a thought. Hope everything works out for y'all.

 

The first two sentences are spot on. If SEGS hadn't listed a guarantee for all SEGS coins and had clearly included a qualification, no one would have said anything. Instead, it made promises and warranties and now seeks to selectively revise things after someone has arguably detrimentally relied on their word. Even if SEGS wouldn't have otherwise have liability, it is opening itself up to claims for detrimental reliance with the wording of its guarantee and in altering the property of another when it knows that it will not honor the guarantee for that piece.

 

What are the plans for those that trusted your old policy. Are you going to honor it?

 

What the hell our you talking about ?

 

@Rick Stachowski I value your input on many topics on CT so I should suggest you be careful of your language as there are some members here who seem to relish playing "moral and speech police."

They may pop up soon as I predicted they would on another thread minutes ago today (and was proven to be correct I might add ). Perhaps they ONLY SINGLE OUT certain members who torment them and let their "friends" slide. I'm guessing you must be one of the "protected" posters.
Lucky You .

 

The only bad word I see is " our " .......

 

I don't understand how your post about a disbarred suicidal lawyer relates in anyway to the posts made in this thread or the original topic. Did I miss something here?

 

Yes you did, now go and read my threads and then maybe, you'll understand the suicide thread . This is turned into a litigation forum, now ......

 

I think your focus is far too narrow. Forget about the OP for a moment and forget about the prospect of recovery. This is about principle, and this goes well beyond SEGS/Briggs. Encroachments to TPG guarantees are a real threat to the certified rare coin market. PCGS does the same thing or at least has also made several substantial retroactive modifications to its guarantee that reduced coverage. SEGS has cited this privately as precedent (different example than what follows). PCGS too has refused to honor its guarantee on an egregiously overgraded Ike (a condition rarity that would have likely fetched a few thousand or more), and declared that anything overgraded by more than two points would not be honored and would be treated as a mechanical error. The more collectors accept this behavior, the greater the abuses will become in the future and companies will breach their warranties with impunity. This will undermine confidence in the market and severely hurt value and liquidity.

 

If the OP had gotten an attorney, and I assume she did, then SEGS would have turned it over to their attorney, and that would have been that.
If she were right her attorney would prevail, and if not, and SEGS was right their attorney would prevail.
I guess if the former were the case we would not have heard any of this. On the other hand, if the latter (SEGS Attorney) prevailed then we would be right here!
Anyone would surely seek the advise of an attorney. JMO

 

The wheels of justice and the legal system move very slowly. This thread isn't an indication, either way, of who is correct legally. If anything this could be the OP's attempt to publicly shame SEGS to add pressure to honor its guarantee or at least settle with the OP without resort to lawyers.

 

This thread is hereby nominated for the 2016 Over-Pontification Award.