PNG says "NO" to coin doctoring!!

I read about this in both last week's CDN and in the current Coin World which goes into more detail. I may be mistaken, but it looks like some of the doctors later complained to PCGS that the holdered doctored coins were unmarketable, and demanded their money back, i.e. PCGS was required to honor it's money guarantee; that's what I call chutzpah! Or it could be that with the increased quality control standards, PCGS was dealing with huge numbers of unmarketable "walking wounded" coins that kept coming back to bite them. I would not be surprized if Mark Chrans or Allen Stockton eventually get fingered on this issue. I once complained to the ANA ethics committee on Mr. Stockton's handiwork, and after the relevant meeting, the vote was "laissez faire".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

OK, so they are doing the high end only. But with the technology available today, why bother when you can set up engraved dies using real coins as templates and punch out brand new ones ? I mean the Chinese mint does a really poor job with the "specimen" coins they produce. But if you were going after the big bucks, why not go whole hog. Run out some new coins, bag scratch them a bit, chemically tone them and I bet they could do it where it would be undetectable ! Once slabbed and graded, who would ever know ? I mean what would the initial costs be ?

 

I am not sure what you are trying to say, but I do know you are oversimplifying the counterfeiting process.

 

Well common sense will tell you,when you get caught and they was doing it for 10 yuears at least.and that many people involved..This is a very very tiny tip of the ice berg..Id bet a whole lot of people are holding these doctored coins this very day..pcgs should recall every single one of them and regrade ,it would be only fair to holders now but the main thing is the Future holders of these doctored coins that parolly now aint worth nothing but the silver content..graders still have some responsibility to the ones that have these doctored up coins...makes ya wonder to though just really how good was pcgs .. better hopefully..Took em over 10 years to catch up to it....Hummmmmm...when ya can doctor and fool da graders..Gradders need to go back to school aswell now and pass stringent test to be recertified them selves..Just my buyer opinion

 

Well when PCGS used the phrase "Coin Doctoring", they were referring to detectable physical alterations and not, again, not Artificial toning. It would be just as rewarding, probably more so for the average collector if they had some analytical marvel machine which could tell the difference 95% of the time, but they don't.

It isn't that PCGS is incompetent, just that they are limited to the detectable. And most of the doctoring detected in the suit, such as the lasering of surfaces , and enhancement of surface details could not be validated until recently at any TPG. It seems almost like a "sting" operation concluding in this lawsuit. They might have been using their newest techniques long enough before announcing to have a base for action. It hopefully will deter any other who physically alters PCGS labeled coins before resubmitting. Also as far as toning, if any change has occurred after slabbing, if it is an appropriate period of time, and there is no visible violation of the slab, I am sure they will honor it. The marketplace seems to value PCGS grading highly, as shown by their market differential. IMO.

 

I believe that there is a huge difference between Chrans (a convicted felon) and Stockton http://www.crs-stockton.com/main.html#1,0 who does coin repair above board and out in the open.

 

well i know for me,if i could afford one of the high end coins it would be in the back of my mind is this one of the famous doctors..lol in some ways now that will be collectable who has the best doctored coin have to find a grading system for that ,lordy how a mind can wonder about things,this will be talked about now for ever, be good for the coin market people will be buying hoping they get one of the infamous Doctors

 

Coin "doctoring"

Then maybe we could have a discussion on the ethics and law consequences of coin doctoring. If you send coins to CRS, will he say "no" if a judgment is made that to work on the coin would be a violation of a Hippocratic oath of numismatics--first do no harm? I doubt Stockton will be sucked into the vortex of this racketeering and conspiracy lawsuit, but many in this industry and hobby will take notice of the truth and consequences of coin doctoring.

There is a big difference with what NCS does--they never add substances to a surface only subtract, and what the doctors do. If you dip a coin you will probably never be on the receiving end of this type of suit.

 

If you look at Stockton's website, what he does (in terms of the coin itself) is just the opposite (of your supposition of a violation of a numismatic Hippocratic oath); the coin is returned to health.
On the other hand, if Stockton was doing what he shows on the website and then selling those coins based on their repaired appearance with the intent to defraud, then you might have an actionable item.

To transfer to another arena, if you do body work on your car or have the engine repaired, at what level or repair work do you disclose that work to a prospective private party buyer? What about when you trade it in to a dealer?
Full disclosure: I have had coins sent to NCS to remove heavy toning, which were subsequently graded as NGC (AU-58 in one case).

 

I have sent coins to both Stockton and NCS, gold coins. NCS refused to work on coins they felt they could not improve by removing matter, and they used some kind of solvent on a High Relief in order to remove surface matter. IMHO Stockton needs to communicate a lot better with customers about what he can and cannot do and have the customer sign some kind of legal release on submissions.

Here is a thread on this case, with the legal basis for it, my apologies if it has been cited previously: http://www.coinlink.com/News/counte...nst-coin-doctors-by-collectors-universe-pcgs/

According to 18 U.S.C. section 331 it is a crime to alter the surfaces of a coin.

 

Fraudulently. It says "Whoever fraudulently alters ..."

It would be interesting to see the legal arguments about whether that statute can be stretched to cover undisclosed coin doctoring. I can see more than two sides to that question.

 

I note that some TPGs will give a net grade with the note "Tooled" or "repaired"

 

I've sent 5 coins to NCS. Two were for removing PVC. Three were for removing unpleasant toning. One of those, an 1875 S/S 20-cent piece, ANACS had net graded for artificial toning.

Of the toned coins, The 1851-O 3cs came back at the same grade, AU55. The Lafayette came back a point higher at MS64. But to the surprise of perhaps no one, the 20-cent piece came back in a NGC purple label holder, this time for cleaning. The AT was clearly a coverup attempt.

Assuming that the perp could be traced, do y'all think this qualifies as coin doctoring?

 

That is incorrect - it was NOT coin doctors who complained to PCGS and demanded their money back. PCGS became aware of the problems by other means and reimbursed the owners of the coins, not the coin doctors.

 

NCS removed the toning after giving me a call and telling me that they suspected it was put there to hide cleaning. ANACS either missed it or didn't bother to note it on the holder.

I decided to go ahead with the process anyway. The coin is what it is, and deserves an honest presentation.

 

You can be sure that PCGS has very rigorous profiling of submitted coins, especially with certified dealers who are submitting high-end coins that may or may not be intentionally doctored. The coins can be tracked from place of origin, through auctions, various coin dealers, to various customers. If the coins come back to the original dealer or group of dealers that had them certified or to PCGS for their money-back guarantee, then the problem coin becomes somewhat "radioactive", and the numerical track of the coin establishes a chain of responsibility. It would probably take several dozen examples to establish place of origin and the problem of PCGS trying to bring those responsible to accountability. In the last month I have handled three non-N,P or A certified coins, two $20 libs. and one Trade Dollar, all obviously doctored to make them saleable, and the former two coins were bought through one of the big dealers; I had to sell each of them below market value.

Soon after the PCGS suit hit the wires, Mark Salzburg of NGC issued a relevant statement at his site re-inforcing NGC's policy on this issue:

An Open Message from Mark Salzberg

Posted on 6/3/2010 NGC’s chairman discusses deceptively altered coins.
NGC employs the best grading team in the world. Our experts include individuals who are highly skilled at detecting coins that have been purposefully and unnaturally altered to lend the appearance of a higher grade. We enhance our capabilities of detection through the use of proprietary technologies, and we continually research new methods and techniques to aid detection.
We don’t allow deceptively altered coins into NGC holders, and our graded coins are acknowledged to be universally problem-free. In the rare event that we do miss an alteration, we offer the strongest guarantee, by far, of any certification company. For collectors, the NGC guarantee is the high-water mark for consumer protection in numismatics.
We hold those who alter coins responsible for their actions that damage the hobby. NGC actively pursues claims against such individuals when warranted. This has always been our policy. This strong stance is absolutely necessary, and we support the efforts of others similarly aimed at eliminating these practices from the hobby.
Mark Salzberg
Chairman

 

"N, P, or A" - I'm guessing he meant PCGS, NGC and ANACS.