When Did My Coin Become A MS-65 ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by birdman

Lets say I bought the penny graded MS-70 by PCGS.Broke it out say in front of a Judge.Resend this penny back to PCGS,and they grade it a MS-68.They guaratee they will pay the differance in value? Wonder if that same penny would grade MS-70 the 2nd time,i bet not.

---

That's not how it works and there's some problems with this approach and for this coin. This particular coin would be readily identifiable by PCGS staff and by their photo records. Also, its provenance would be well documented. Further, with a "perfect" Lincoln Cent, there would be considerable risk in degrading it during the crack-out.

PCGS's (and NGC's and ANACS') warranties state that if a coin proves to be a lower grade, it will make up the difference. This means a provenance must be established to demonstrate that such a coin downgraded is the same coin. It would have to stay in its original MS-70 holder and be submitted as such to NGC and/or ANACS so that a trail can be maintained.

Pretty easy for them to say,"Yep,same grade" when the coin comes to them in the original slab.Especially if it would cost them large sums of money if they down graded it.The only real test is for them to grade it without seeing the original grade but that ain't going to happen.
I know they say that they put tape over the grade of every coin that goes before their graders for regrading.I would also bet if they downgraded a 1896-O Morgan from MS64 to MS63,it would be back at MS64 before your got the coin back.

My satellite problem has put me behind the curve on this topic. My signal is still flaky, so this may be the only post I upload tonight.

I don't think any of us are in a position to question the validity of the stated warranties of the top three TPGs until one of us has experience with an attempt to apply the warranty. I was certainly in this position when my 1890-CC Morgan originally graded MS-62 was downgraded by first PCGS, then ANACS as "cleaned". I blew it when I cracked it out of the NGC slab, then submitted it to PCGS. Even though I had (still have) pics (scans, actually) of the coin in the NGC slab and pics after I cracked it out, I failed to fully document the process since I had not expected it would come back "cleaned". Further, the images I have are low resolution for email rather than the original high resolution images, thus can't be enlarged due to pixilation. Hence, my level of proof in a claim against NGC is very low. Last, the question of value lost is begged since I about broke even on the eventual sale of the ANACS slabbed "cleaned MS detail" rather than actually lost cash. I suppose an argument could be made that I lost a potential $300 in value when I went from NGC MS-62 down to "cleaned MS details" at two other top TPGs. For "only" 300 bucks, I don't think I'd want to make a stink at NGC, especially since I just joined them as an Associate Member through the ANA. If it had been a much more valuable coin, I think I would (and will in the future) be a lot more cautious about cracking a coin out of a slab before resubmitting it.

Further, NGC's guarantee http://www.ngccoin.com/services/wri...guaranty.asp requires the coin remain in the original NGC slab. PCGS' guarantee is the same: http://www.pcgs.com/bill.chtml . Thus, before a warranty claim is made, several things need to happen. 1)The owner needs to be good enough at grading and detecting problem coins to determine there might be a problem with a coin's grade or the coin itself. 2) Someone who is good at grading and detecting problem coins needs to take a close look at the coin for a second opinion. 3) I'm not sure exactly how it might be done, but independent verification from one of the other two top TPGs would be very helpful in determination that a coin was over-graded or mis-graded. It would have to be done without taking the coin out of the original slab. 4) A paper trail needs to be made of the coin's provenance in the instance it changes hands and subsequent owners learn that its slab is not accurate. 5) Contact should be made with the subject TPG before submitting it for re-evaluation to learn how the process should be handled (cost for re-evaluation, for one reason although there shouldn't be one for this type situation; a list of characteristics which might be required by the TPG why a coin might have been overgraded for another reason).

I learned a not-so-expensive-but-cudda-been-a-lot-worse lesson with my 90-CC Morgan. If I had even the slightest suspicion that the NGC MS-62 was gonna be labeled "cleaned" by both PCGS and ANACS, I would have handled its crossover a lot differently. I certainly had the potential for a valid claim against NGC given how the matter ended. Certainly, with any of my coins worth a lot more where the difference in value from one grade to the next could measure in the thousands, I'm gonna treat the situation a lot differently, especially if I have any plans to have a coin regraded or crossed over into another slab.

It also occurs to me to contact NGC giving them all the particulars on my 90-CC Morgan to ask them how they might have preferred a warranty claim on this coin to be handled.

Fred

It never "becomes" anything. When the TPG sees it they render an OPINION of the grade as they feel it is at that time. An opinion is just that, an opinion. Subject to change at any time upon further consideration.

<< Further, the top TPGs grades have stood up in court as evidenced by the dismissal of ACG's first lawsuit against PCGS and PNG. >>

ACG won that lawsuit. Collectors Universe and the other three remaining defendants settled. Now ACG's FEDERAL lawsuit against them was dismissed, but not upon any merit of the defendants position, it was dismissed because ACG filed it claiming anti-trust alligations and the court decided it wasn't an anti-trust matter. So it was dismissed and arguments were never heard.