Very Disappointing Experience On My First Major (Near $7k) Auction Purchase - Advice Needed!

That is a textbook conflict of interest.

This is the main point in my opinion. Do you want to return it? If so just ask HA to cancel bid and move on! I would not spin it as a legal dispute about responsibilities, just explain that you discovered that the coin was sold previously at a much lower grade and this info was regrettably was not written in the description. I believe HA will cancel the bid without any fuss. If they cancel bids for "buyer remorse" I can't imagine them making trouble for your objectively much better reasons.

If you want to keep the coin then you can just let them know to make them aware.. they will probably thank you. Trying to get some sort of compensation from them (in form of credit for future sales or maybe BP waiving) might be a much more difficult route but maybe not outside the realm of possibilities?

If HA gives you the option of canceling the sale because of inadequate disclosure, I would probably do that. The price might be reasonable for that coin, but I would always have some regret that I could have bought the exact same coin in a different holder last year at a much lower price. Plus, it seems like it was an impulse purchase rather than one that was well-researched and considered. And the price takes a lot away from potential future appreciation.

Heritage replied, asked to stand by. I was not asking for bid cancelation, just for clarity what was supposed to have been disclosed in the description and who is responsible for its accuracy as it does affect the coin's perceived value.

Found (the most?) recent sale for the The Donald G Partrick NGC MS-61BN (the left MS-61coin above) on 17 Mar 2021 at Heritage: https://coins.ha.com/itm/colonials/...1330-15104.s

The provenance in this auction description:]
Ex: Frederick B. Taylor (Bowers & Merena, 3/1987), lot 2258; Donald G. Partrick.


The NGC verification link. It was encapsulated by NGC on 8 Jul 2020:
https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/5746978-020/61/


This same coin (99% sure) was sold as an AU back in The Frederick B. Taylor Collection, March 26-28, 1987 at the Bowers/Merena auction, and this same sale from 1987 was referenced by the SHI on page 448 as #3 right below the only two known (as of 2013) 62-q GEMs.

So, in this auction in 2020, they did disclose the provenance as well, but not that it also was an AU coin. Assuming, it was an unslabbed AU coin. I do not see any way to confirm that 1987 sale since the Bowers archives only seem to go back to 1999. Short of the actual Bowers/Merena hard copy sales catalog from March 26-28,1987, (which itself seems to be a collectible item already), cannot confirm 100%.

So maybe my coin with its not so complete provenance description is something that quite frequently happens, and seems to be the case more often then not.

@Hunter611 Thank you for your input. I am o board with your thinking Yes, there is a balance between feeling "wronged" and the responsibility to live up to the agreed upon terms of the auction (even if not read with a fine tooth comb) . No doubt that it can leave a bad taste in the mouth while owning this coin into the future.

As this point, my sense of responsibility to pay is stronger than feeling "wronged". And the more I am researching and educating myself on this variety, the more I am feeling at peace with the purchase. I have until 4 Dec to pay HA in order to remain in good standing. HA Customer Service told me last week to standby as their "Coins section" looks into my "well-detailed" concerns about the incomplete provenance. If I do not hear back by 3 Dec, I will pay anyway. The rationale: the more I looked into this variety's top known (to me) specimens, the more I am at peace. Of course, I am very curious what they will say!


Of the only known existing GEMs in any TPG for the 62-q "hidden WM" variety are: one MS63 PCGS and three MS61s. The 2013 SHI reference book for the 62-q lists only two GEMs, and 5ea AUs...no exact grades cited for either. One of these two GEMs in the SHI book on pg 448 is the "Bushnell-Parmelee specimen". I traced back this coin to one of the three current MS61s, and last sold for $6,670 in Aug 2024. The other GEM on SHI pg 448, called the "Anton" GEM, I was not able to trace. But I wonder, if this coin is the PCGS MS-63BN which I was also not able to trace?

I also managed to trace back from the currently known only three MS61s that one other was also an AU grade in its prior life before slabbed by NGC in as MS61, like mine. A sale on that was $9000 in Mar 2021 and it was the "Donald G Partrick" (ex. Taylor 1987, Lot 2258) AU coin listed on pg 448 of the SHI book in 2013. So all three currently known MS-61s in this variety are accounted for: two of them crossed from AU into MS61, and one was a GEM in the first place.

Interestingly, the SHI has a 440 pages supplement that just came out this year to their 2013 original reference book. "It is not merely a second edition of the authors' previous book; rather, it contains original and largely updated condition census information for every New Jersey copper variety, with many never-before-seen photographs."

https://colonialcoins.org/c4-publications-2/

Good on you for choosing to pay.