Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1711303, member: 26302&quot;]Don&#039;t disagree. However, I would focus on one fact I believe you are missing. You are saying it was a contract for a MS66 cent. If the coin is in fact a matte proof, its NOT a MS66. It may be a PF66, but could never be an MS66. That is the foundation of my argument, that effectively the good in the contract was incorrect, in which case the transaction should be void and renegotiated with the correct good. A dealer should have noticed if this was indeed a proof. I would liken it to an overlooked mintmark which decided changes the nature of the good.[/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