Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;kaparthy, post: 22140, member: 57463&quot;]This is not unusual.&nbsp; If it were one of the Big Four (ANACS, ICG, NGC, or PCGS), you might get obvious human error fixed at their expense.&nbsp; However, I believe that the fact is that if you read the fine print, they are not responsible for such mistakes. You start with a mistaken date and the next thing you know the collectors wants a higher grade because, well, &quot;obviously the grader made a human error when they failed to see this coin for its true grade...&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, you would have to read the actual wording of the contracts.</p><p><br /></p><p>I look to &quot;fitness of use&quot; exclusions in software.&nbsp; If you buy the hypothetical TaxLedger 2004 for Windows and you get audited and fined, you cannot come back on the software developer or the store that sold it.&nbsp; The licensing agreement says that the seller offers no warranty as to fitness of use or mechantability.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>It has become a tiresome cliche in the hobby for some people to rant about Accugrade and the Hagers.&nbsp; To me, this is just picking on the smallest sister: it makes the others feel prettier.&nbsp; In other words, there is nothing special about Accugrade for better or worse.&nbsp; If there is, it can only be a matter of degree, not of kind.&nbsp; Every grading service has problems.&nbsp; Every service makes mistakes.&nbsp; Every service issues <b>opinions only</b> -- as the largest has admitted in federal court -- and those opinions are argued by buyers and sellers.</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, an obvious blunder might be remediated as a matter of good will.&nbsp; I think you will find, however, that none of the Big Four does it as a matter of policy.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in