PCGS vs Coin Doctors Lawsuit

As stated about classic vehicles - the original will be worth far more than a rebuild. Baseball cards cannot be altered. Non-intrusive conservation is somewhat expected for cloth items and paintings. You don't seem to understand about coins, though. Sure, you can dip your coin in MS-70. But if you end up stripping the luster because you have done so, then you have destroyed much of the collector value. It would be the same as if you took a sledgehammer to the hood of an original '67 Mustang. You can get a new hood, but that car will never be original again.. and an expert will know that.

If you use acetone to get PVC off and you do it correctly, that's called conservation. You are taking a destructive element off, and since you are careful then there is no harm to the coin surface.

One thing that is a part of every "doctoring" or change to a coin is intent. No "sniffer" will ever be able to detect intent. Coins made/changed for the collector market are a relatively recent phenomenon; if a fake was made 150 years ago (or hell, in the 40's like the US 5cent) it was more likely to be expected to blend in and circulate alongside the real coins, not to be peeked at with a magnifying glass and queried for its grade and price. (I say "relative" but put that into context with how long we've had coins..)

Especially with changing an existing coin: whether it's rainbow toning, dipping, or filling of a hole - intent matters. That is somewhat covered by PNG and ANA membership standards - when you sign up, you're saying your intent will not be evil. Whether you are lying or not is a different matter, and you will build your reputation thusly.

Being able to infer the intent takes knowledge of both the coin and the reputation of the seller. Coins were being sold sight unseen (i.e., through mail order sell lists), and buyers started needing something a bit more to trust than just the seller's say-so, especially in cases where they could not see the coin in hand. This was the hole the TPGs were supposed to fill - they guaranteed the coin you've never seen but want to buy will be the coin that the seller says it is. It's just gotten all kinds of crazy since then. In the end, if you know the coin type then trust your gut; if you do not know it, you can most likely trust the TPG.. but if you buy the book on the coin and learn about it first, you can completely avoid them until it comes time for your heirs to sell your collection.

Systems like these help both new and experienced collectors. There are fewer rotten eggs in them by their design; reputation loss is exponentially worse when outted as a jerk. It's fine if you are not a member, but don't try to turn our YNs against them, especially since many have the capacity to help them get started and keep them going when many of us as individuals do not.

I thought for sure you were actually trying to dig for info, but damn. You've spent more time and effort hollering about it and "almost" making false accusations than it would have taken to look up the information you supposedly seek.

All of the information you need is in this article. The original case was dismissed with prejudice.

The new case was filed in Orange County, CA on March 24, 2011.

Hm.. needs more keywords. SILVANO DIGENOVA VS. COLLECTORS UNIVERSE 03/24/2011 Civil Case, more info below.

How to research:
1. Most courts are online now, start at the state level
2. Find your county
3. Make an account if you need to
4. Go through the different searches - sometimes one will want to charge for the search while others just want to charge for resulting documents. In our case, it wants to charge for name search, but had no trouble searching by date.
5. Search the search results page for the name in the case & click the link

You end up at a page with a ton of info and with a Print link. Click that and it lists every document in the case. Some you can order for download, some not.

Case Summary:
Case Id: 30-2011-00460938-CU-NP-CJC
Case Title: SILVANO DIGENOVA VS. COLLECTORS UNIVERSE
Case Type: NON-PI/PD/WD TORT - OTHER
Filing Date: 03/24/2011
Category: CIVIL - UNLIMITED
Register Of Actions:
ROA Docket Filing Date Filing Party Document Select
1 COMPLAINT FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO; KRILL, GREG; WESSELINK, RICHARD ON 03/24/2011 03/24/2011 10 pages
2 SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO; KRILL, GREG; WESSELINK, RICHARD ON 03/24/2011 03/24/2011 1 pages
3 CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO; KRILL, GREG; WESSELINK, RICHARD ON 03/24/2011 03/24/2011 1 pages
4 CASE ASSIGNED TO JUDICIAL OFFICER MOSS, ROBERT ON 03/24/2011. 03/24/2011 1 pages
5 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 166 - COMPLAINT OR OTHER 1ST PAPER IN THE AMOUNT OF 395.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10863704 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10687597. 03/24/2011 1 pages
6 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 04/07/2011 04/07/2011 3 pages
7 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 04/12/2011 04/12/2011 2 pages
8 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 04/12/2011 04/12/2011 2 pages
9 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 04/15/2011 04/15/2011 2 pages
10 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 04/15/2011 04/15/2011 2 pages
11 MOTION TO STRIKE (SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE) FILED BY COLLECTORS UNIVERSE, INC.; ATTLESEY, KEITH; STORM, SUZANNE; VARTIAN, ARMEN; ATTLESEY & STORM, LLP ON 05/04/2011 05/04/2011 21 pages
12 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 167 - ANSWER OR OTHER 1ST PAPER IN THE AMOUNT OF 395.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10896429 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10720321. 05/04/2011 1 pages
13 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 167 - ANSWER OR OTHER 1ST PAPER, 167 - ANSWER OR OTHER 1ST PAPER, 167 - ANSWER OR OTHER 1ST PAPER, 167 - ANSWER OR OTHER 1ST PAPER IN THE AMOUNT OF 1,580.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10896435 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10720327. 05/04/2011 1 pages
14 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT SCHEDULED FOR 07/08/2011 AT 10:00:00 AM IN C23 AT CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. 05/04/2011 NV
15 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE FILED BY ATTLESEY & STORM, LLP; ATTLESEY, KEITH; COLLECTORS UNIVERSE, INC.; STORM, SUZANNE; VARTIAN, ARMEN ON 05/04/2011 05/04/2011 232 pages
16 NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE FILED BY COLLECTORS UNIVERSE, INC. ON 05/06/2011 05/06/2011 3 pages
17 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 37 - STIPULATION AND ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF 20.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10930522 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10754414. 06/14/2011 1 pages
18 STIPULATION AND ORDER (TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE FOR MOTION TO STRIKE) FILED BY THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE ON 06/17/2011 06/17/2011 5 pages
19 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT SCHEDULED FOR 08/12/2011 AT 10:00:00 AM IN C23 AT CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. 07/08/2011 NV
20 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT CONTINUED TO 08/12/2011 AT 10:00 AM IN THIS DEPARTMENT. 07/08/2011 NV
21 MINUTES FINALIZED FOR MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT 07/08/2011 10:00:00 AM. 07/08/2011 1 pages
22 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 37 - STIPULATION AND ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF 20.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10959383 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10783275. 07/26/2011 1 pages
23 ORDER - OTHER FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 07/29/2011 07/29/2011 5 pages
24 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT SCHEDULED FOR 09/16/2011 AT 10:00:00 AM IN C23 AT CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. 07/29/2011 NV
25 NOTICE - OTHER (OF ENTRY OF ORDER) FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO; KRILL, GREG; WESSELINK, RICHARD ON 08/09/2011 08/09/2011 10 pages
26 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 37 - STIPULATION AND ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF 20.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 10984619 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10808511. 09/01/2011 1 pages
27 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT SCHEDULED FOR 10/21/2011 AT 10:00:00 AM IN C23 AT CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. 09/08/2011 NV
28 ORDER - OTHER FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO ON 09/08/2011 09/08/2011 5 pages
29 PAYMENT RECEIVED BY FOR 37 - STIPULATION AND ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF 20.00, TRANSACTION NUMBER 11013994 AND RECEIPT NUMBER 10837886. 10/19/2011 1 pages
30 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT SCHEDULED FOR 12/30/2011 AT 10:00:00 AM IN C23 AT CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. 10/21/2011 NV
31 MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT CONTINUED TO 12/30/2011 AT 10:00 AM IN THIS DEPARTMENT. 10/21/2011 NV
32 MINUTES FINALIZED FOR MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT 10/21/2011 10:00:00 AM. 10/21/2011 1 pages
33 E-FILING TRANSACTION 266745 RECEIVED ON 10/20/2011 03:32:59 PM. 10/25/2011 NV
34 NOTICE OF HEARING (OF CONTINUED HEARING ON MOTION TO STRIKE) FILED BY ATTLESEY, KEITH; VARTIAN, ARMEN; STORM, SUZANNE; ATTLESEY & STORM, LLP; COLLECTORS UNIVERSE, INC. ON 10/20/2011 10/20/2011 3 pages
35 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE - ENTIRE ACTION FILED BY DIGENOVA, SILVANO; KRILL, GREG; WESSELINK, RICHARD ON 11/07/2011 11/07/2011 2 pages
36 COMPLAINT DISPOSED WITH DISPOSITION OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL. 11/07/2011 NV
37 CASE DISMISSED WITH DISPOSITION OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL 11/07/2011 NV
Participants:
Name Type Assoc Start Date End Date
ATTLESEY & STORM, LLP DEFENDANT 03/24/2011
BARTEL & EVANS LLP ATTORNEY 03/24/2011
RICHARD WESSELINK PLAINTIFF 03/24/2011
COLLECTORS UNIVERSE DEFENDANT 03/24/2011
COLLECTORS UNIVERSE, INC. DEFENDANT 05/04/2011
SUZANNE STORM DEFENDANT 04/13/2011
ARMEN VARTIAN DEFENDANT 03/24/2011
GREG KRILL PLAINTIFF 03/24/2011
JACKSON & STEPHENSON, LLP ATTORNEY 03/24/2011
KEITH ATTLESEY DEFENDANT 03/24/2011
SILVANO DIGENOVA PLAINTIFF 03/24/2011
RUTAN & TUCKER LLP ATTORNEY 05/04/2011
Hearings:
Description Date Time Department Judge

-----

So.. now that you know where to find the info (and hopefully how to do so again, yay research!), why not educate the unwashed masses? Now every web search looking for this information will lead here - so make it good

Edited to add: the data above is used for illustrative purposes as to the great swath of public information available if a search is done - the available pages for each action shows how much detail can be obtained. I can chop some out if the post is too long.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Really the disservice would be letting collectors believe those code of ethics means they can blindly trust anyone who says they're one of those dealers. All any of them mean is that someone filled out the application and pays the fees. When's the last time the ANA or PNG kicked out a dealer member, what actions have they taken against dealers ect ect. The worst thing they generally do is kick one out and they certainly don't make a big public deal out of it to alert people.

My point is morality and ethics are governed by the individual not some membership. Someone isn't going to become ethical because they filled out an application just like someone who doesn't isn't lacking them just because of that. There's plenty of great dealers that are and aren't members as well as collectors just like there are bad apple dealers who are members as well. People should let reputations and their own experiences dictate opinions, not memberships.

 

Would you please link me to where someone said to blindly trust an ANA dealer? I can't find it.

Random: This was a fun read (go about 10 more pages; more Secret Service and fake banknote stuff in there), this section in particular:

I don't know about if/when they boot people out. They'd probably have to be pretty careful about something like that; if they announce it or otherwise publicize it they could be looking at a defamation lawsuit. But IANAL.

 

I was pretty clear in stating that a newb logging on the internet and finding out about the lawsuit will get a false sense of security because one must meet you and get a lesson on searching legal archives to find out what happened.

No one including me is Gona read all that garbage. They will read these forums and coin world, etc. It sounds like you have a duck in the race. And I can't be the only one viewing the lack of stories, etc on what happened subsequently as some form of misinformation or propaganda. If you spend only 5 minutes interested in this you will come away of the opinion that PCGS did some heroic thing and it's pretty obvious if you spend a sixth minute or more that this is fallacy. It was pure self interest--which is fine but don't make it seem like you are doing me or any collectors a favor.

Thanks for putting that together. If I have time to kill, I'll become an investigative journalist and hopefully if some other person like me comes along they will find the 4th page of this 2017 thread...and if you re-read how I started this, you will see I was asking anyone here if they knew what happened. Maybe you could post 2nd and save us all a bunch of trouble.

 

PCGS called these people coin doctors and told us they laser coins and build metal up to make coins high dollar items--one was $90,000. PCGS is offering them to me on their authorized dealer page. I don't know what else to say.

 

Uh oh. Found an area of agreement.

 

Round 1 goes to @GDJMSP on a 10-9 score on the 10-point must system.
Let the Round Card girl into the ring with the Round 2 card.

 

A newb logging onto the Internet is either going to learn first, or learn the hard way, that research is the only thing keeping your money in your wallet. You do not trust any_single_source, ever. There are too many whose agendas do not involve honesty or altruism, even at places like CT.

 

I wish I could "Like" this post about a gazillion times.

 

My point is: 95% of what I see online--my research--is about the initial lawsuit and how amazing this is for the consumer. There's A LOT online about this. Equally important is the fact that they didn't follow through with doing all the things they were praised for. "Nail those doctors to the floor"..."I hope they do jail time"...This is the sentiment generated by the initial announcement. PCGS listed real people with real names and businesses and real alleged crimes like Rico and fraud and then doesn't follow through. Somehow that wasn't newsworthy. Then a year later the suit initiated by the dealers. Also not newsworthy. I just don't think many are going to dig into the legal archives. I don't think they should have to. News of these subsequent events should have been equally disseminated.

 

Precisely, which is why I am a MAJOR critic of Internet-based research, and especially the "link please" culture. I've now worked in government service of two types for a total of 13 years, and in BOTH CASES, we are/were outright forbidden to put most of our best stuff online. People who think they're replacing good old documentary research, such as "docket diving", with web searches, frankly DESERVE the bad reputations they're spinning toward.

And most of the research I now do also isn't available online and requires me to sometimes travel to county courthouses and do the PA state equivalent of FOIA requests (we call them RTK's) IN PERSON!

The typical government response to FOIA and RTK laws is to make the process so cumbersome, you'll just give up.

 

I completely agree with you on all points here; in my opinion a prudent observer would not see anyone involved who wasn't covered in...stuff.

 

I would have said a later date for when when they really started too but certainly fair enough. Ended in a consent decree that wasn't even a slap on the wrist and had no fine, it is interesting in the sense though that it was part of the ground work that laid the foundation for everything having the disclaimers in ads that we see today.

 

Here's an example of someone's 2010 year end wrap up:

"Exposing how bad the coin doctoring issue had become, was by far the MOST important POSITIVE thing to have happened (in 2010). Had everyone just kept their heads turned and let these criminals rape coins and the coin market, it would have killed the hobbies future.

PCGS took a heroic lead in firing off a lawsuit with absolute hard evidence against a small crew. Other coin small to mid size docs took notice and are running scared. Now, PCGS is coming out with even more sophisticated technology to catch these guys and hopefully make them stop forever. "

This is what I am talking about...Its rubbish in retrospect. At the time it was posted maybe it was ok to say (even though it had been dismissed at this point because the dealers weren't served).

Here's something else: "Keep in mind, even though we ALL have been violated in some fashion by the docs, PCGS has been harmed directly with a broken contract. I predict a slam dunk win by PCGS. I hope after this first suit, they do another and another until the white flags appear at the docs bourse tables."

Yeah, right. Slam dunk lol.

PCGS never got taken to task. I think everyone wants to protect PCGS for some reason. I dont know why. Money?

 

Here's where people like Laura Sperber deserve some of the credit. Yes, PCGS started the jihad against the coin doctors, but Laura became the Ayatollah of the jihad. She ran a successful campaign for ANA Board of Governors pretty much based on doing ultimate damage to the docs. In fact, once she took office, she pretty much couldn't give a darn about any other subject. Once she felt the coin doctoring thing was under control, she voluntarily decided not to run again.

I don't know the particular hows and whys, but the doctoring thing quieted down, and I think the sniffers went a long way for several of the doctoring means (not lasering, however).

If you want an opinion from the "Mac Daddy" of PCGS apologists (IMHO) ask @baseball21.

 

So Ive been researching the Sperber person. She doesnt make it sound like it was too successful:

https://coinweek.com/opinion/commentary/candid-2015-hot-topics-coin-market-laura-sperber/

She was also one of these people calling PCGS heroes for the lawsuit that went nowhere and then never even followed up when it was dismissed, etc. In fact Ive seen one place where she later blames consumers for the doctors:

https://coinweek.com/education/coin-grading/laura-sperber-hot-topics-coin-doctoring-puttied-stella/

She strikes me as really self-serving. Doctors hurt her business and pretends its really about the consumer. She wont name names either...now that would be courageous:

"Sperber was unwilling to name the worst offenders. Instead, she feels that the problem is best dealt with behind the scenes. We disagree, because in the interim doctored coins will still be passed on to us collectors and we may not be tipped off in time to those culpable of such fraud and deception." (https://coinweek.com/education/coin-grading/laura-sperber-hot-topics-coin-doctoring-puttied-stella/)

Shes also said she wouldnt name names because on the off chance she didnt win she might be sued and that would cost big bucks...but sued this guy no problem:

https://coinweek.com/opinion/market...cs-announces-lawsuit-in-latest-market-report/

Also a CAC shareholder. Just like PCGS being heroic...i dont see it here. I see her intentionally giving PCGS a pass. She shouldve ripped them a new a-hole after they let that coin doctor lawsuit come to nothing. Instead...crickets.

I could be wrong. Hope I am but this is my impression based on the publicly available info ive come across.

And I hope you dont hate me for saying it because I think you are awesome btw!

 

What you're missing - and this is understandable; it won't necessarily be immediate to many Searches - is her long history of standing on those principles, in public, on both the PCGS Forum and others. She's torn them a new one repeatedly on their own turf.

Unfortunately (for them), she's also a whale of a dealer, transacting some of the highest-end coins available on the market. Legend Numismatics is one of only a few dealers you'd visit if you wished to spend a million dollars on one coin. Denigrating Legend would be...problematic for PCGS.

Frankly, over the last few years I suspect she's learned how to throw her weight around a bit more subtly... Heaven knows she has plenty of power to shift things.

 

Oh no you di'n't. Yup, you did. You went there.

When Laura left the Board, I asked the guy doing the new portraits of the Board what he was going to do to replace Laura in the "eye candy" department. I think he swallowed his epiglottis.

 

I meant absolutely nothing about her physical appearance; merely the stature in the industry allowing her to bend things to her will.

I've edited my post to make that meaning clearer, and thank you for pointing out that she's not the only bull in a china shop in numismatics.