Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on June 13, 2015 at 4:08pm

Great! They won't be open again until Monday, anyway.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by michelle on June 13, 2015 at 11:40pm

Thanks for that GP.  I think the confusion around the pre certified PSA issue is an important issue  to resolve.

Maybe someone on the forum knows the answer to this question that has been puzzling me.  I don't write as well or as clearly as some of you so you will have to bear with me.

RR don't take ccards any more because of the number of chargebacks from    customers.  But do people think major third party authenticators were involved , at the request of these customers, in deciding these purchases were non genuine?  I ask this because when I needed to do chargeback for an item (not from R&R) I had to get credible supporting evidence to back up my claims that the autograph was not genuine and it  wasn't as easy as I thought it would be for the chargeback to be upheld.  Did R & R not dispute any of these chargebacks?  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bernie on June 14, 2015 at 8:54am

Regarding the pre cert, and Mike T comments, I dearly would like to agree but I keep finding flaws in the logic

Am I to understand that, on a pre cert item (the ones where a full LoA is included is very clear to me), if I pay for the TPA LoA, then I give up the right to return in the 5 year period b/c it came delivered with a TPA LoA? So, the only way to retain the warranty is to decline Purchasing the LoA? This is the "Non sequitur" I can't seem to get around

On credit cards, I seriously doubt (but have no evidence pro nor con) that a chargeback can be made 5 years down the road. I can see that 30, 90 days and 1 year would be reasonable limits, but 5 years would be very difficult to see that possibility. If you accept this premise, the reason for dropping credit card payments really boils down to seller having a stronger burden of proof on a dispute, although Michelle is correct, as recently I have seen credit card companies requiring far more information from the buyer (it was a $12 chargeback, and I am positive they spent more $ on the paperwork than the amount in question, which in the end, was credited....)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike T on June 14, 2015 at 10:05am

I understand the pre-cert concern, I don't think the language in their terms is clear enough to make a call either way. That will have to be a question for them to answer and maybe they will adjust their terms to make it more clear.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gratefulphish on June 14, 2015 at 10:33am

I don't believe that any credit card company would consider a charge-back more than maybe six months maximum, but certainly not five years down the road. They would be inundated with people trying to return everything from TVs to toasters, if there was that long of a charge-back period.  The CC companies have a reasonable right to expect a customer to act diligently in such matters.

I think that RR dropped both CCs and Paypal, as I understand they also did, simply because it does make it more difficult to return an item.  If you pay by check, wire or money order, you have no rights except what RR allows under their terms and conditions.  I don't think that I would ever buy anything from them based upon that alone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by michelle on June 14, 2015 at 11:43am

I know exactly where you are coming from   GP.  But I was wondering what reasons did customers give for using chargeback  in the recent past which was the reason R & R gave for not accepting ccards or paypal anymore ? 'It doesn't match   my wallpaper when hang on the wall'  from an R & R customer hopefully would not   constitute a chargeback being upheld!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gratefulphish on June 14, 2015 at 12:05pm

The only reason that I know of that a credit card company would allow a chargeback, is if the item is not authentic as described.  They are not generally there to force companies to take any return, from any customer, for any reason. They would go broke trying to chase back and forth between sellers and buyers.  But, if you have a legitimate complaint that the item is not authentic, then you have a valid basis to seek a chargeback.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dane on June 14, 2015 at 3:42pm

I recall chargebacks being allowed for two years (maybe more) from date of purchase, assuming you never paid off your balance in that time. Otherwise, I think the 180 days sounds appropriate.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gratefulphish on June 14, 2015 at 12:21pm

I realize that this is in the middle of the thread, but otherwise it was going to nest four levels deep into another unrelated part of this thread.

Here is a proposed first draft of questions to RR Auctions regarding their new changed guarantee of authenticity, and their new terms and conditions. We can discuss adding subtracting or rephrasing any of them.

Proposed List of RR Auction Questions

1.  What is the term of the current RR Auction guarantee of authenticity?

2.  What is the difference between an Auction Certificate, and a Letter of Authenticity?

3.  Is the Auction Certificate transferable?

4.  Could a subsequent purchaser of the item from the original Bidder, return an item within the five year period, if it was subsequently determined not to be authentic?

5.  Has RR Auction stopped issuing Letters of Authenticity?

6.  If an auction item has a “pre-certification” from PSA or any other TPA entity, does RR still back the item with any form of guarantee of authenticity?

7.  If a “pre-certified” PSA item was later determined not to be authentic by REAL or another entity, can the Bidder return the item to RR Auction?

8.  Is the “pre-certification” considered by RR Auction to be a COA, LOA or “its equivalent” for purposes of limiting or negating your guarantee of authenticity?

9.  If an item is “pre-certified” and the Bidder pays for the COA/LOA, does that negate any further guarantee by RR Auction?

10.  If RR Auction sells an item that came with a previously issued COA/LOA in the possession of the consignor, i.e., not an item submitted by RR to the TPA or otherwise “pre-certified by RR Auction, is that TPA the only source of recourse a Bidder would have if the item was later determined not to be authentic?

11.  Are you still a member of UACC, and if so, do you still maintain their mandatory lifetime guarantee of authenticity and right to return items determined not to be authentic?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carlos on June 14, 2015 at 3:14pm

Am I the only one who thinks the guarantee of an autograph should be transferable? Like how does it become not authentic when someone else buys it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dane on June 14, 2015 at 4:00pm

I explained this earlier, Carlos, but here goes again:

Party A sells Michael Jackson autograph to Party B for $700 before MJ dies.

Party B sells MJ autograph to Party C for $3800 after MJ dies. Party C submits autograph to PSA, who fails it.

Party A shouldn't be liable for $3800 or a replacement to Party C. Party A is liable to refund ($700) or replacement (at the seller's option) with receipt of purchase, to Party B. The guarantee is non-transferable, even though the guarantee may be for a lifetime. At no time will Party A be liable to refund or replacement (of similar to original purchase value) to anyone other than Party B.

To me, it seems straight forward that a guarantee should never extend beyond parties (or their representatives) to the original transaction.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carlos on June 14, 2015 at 4:30pm

I'm not asking about that just yet Dane
What I am saying is if an autograph is deemed authentic then why would that change just because it is sold?
The guarantee should be for whoever who owns the autograph right?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Next ›
• Page