We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

PSA/DNA Certified Items - Right or Wrong

Not being a dealer or auctioneer I am perfectly suited to referee this discussion if need be. This section is mostly for Items that PSA/DNA has certified that in an opinion of authenticators has missed the mark (AND NOT as far as they know been corrected) along with any other items of significance.

In some cases the certification provided might be a simple rejection while in other cases it's certifying it as authentic when it may be far from it.

The thread is not about the good, the bad or ugly of 3rd parties as there is already an excellent thread in the forum on this started by R&R's Bobby Livington that everyone should follow. That thread alone has produced three disccusions on Farrah Fawcett, Elvis, and now this.

Hopefully, AM members will follow this thread (I am sure the fraudsters & propaganda machines will) and point others to it - Perhaps, the owners of the item that is cited. Those owners can then deal with the authentication firm or sellers and report back their journey.

Since I don't expect the PSA/DNAs of the world to come online and defend/refute (althugh the have an open invitation) the postings then be advised this is not a thread to speculate, accuse, or otherwise besmirch what is or what isn't being done.

So 'nuff said and on with the items. To keep discussions focused and contained - Each Item contributors need to stay in the realm of that item so commentary is not all over the place.

remember if you post an item denote the PSA/DNA number on their sticker... One, if they choose can also validate the item's number on the PSA/DNAs database to see if it is in fact a product of PSA/DNA as we have heard that the fraudsters are/have created bogus ones and report your findings here.

Tags: certification, certifications, errors, forgeries, psa, psa/dna

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on April 29, 2011 at 1:29pm

Why don't you ask for a closeup of the cert? I'd hate to see an innocent seller have an accusation of fraud hanging over their head.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on April 29, 2011 at 3:38pm

Rich - never know but send him an inquiry.

Steve, I was not of the opinion it was just of LOAs. When did they start restricting it to just loas?

I do recall that ones done at shows often times show up without a picture, when they show up.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on April 29, 2011 at 3:53pm

I don't know if it's ever been any other way. The COAs are supposed to be listed, but without photos. The LOAs are supposed to be listed with photos.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on April 30, 2011 at 11:51am

I sent him a message, asking where it was signed and what the PSA/DNA # is. Should be interesting to see the response if I get one. As it stands, there are three good reasons why that jersey is really fishy.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on May 3, 2011 at 11:59am

Never got a a response. The signature didn't look right and neither did the PSA "authentication." At least the person who paid almost $200 for it can wear the jersey.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on April 29, 2011 at 3:49pm

Ok, Ok, I am back on this "pre-certified" statement of PSA/DNA that appears in place of an auction house. I can understand thet they don't want to add "whatever" it is to an auctions "COA" but what are they providing in additon. Nothing? At that frankly seems "unethical"! The buyer receives nada! If an auction house is promoting an item has been pre-certified by PSA/DNA - then they should be providing some form of provenance.

It would appear to me to be somewhat disengenuine to simply say "oh, we provided a "pre-cert" and not have something to show for it. I understand the issue that they should name who the "pre-cert" was done by rather than just have Orlando's name appear. A buyer should not be forced into having to pay additional $$ to obtain one.

So Again for those on this site - how can we address this as it is a terrible practice and worse than the old auction house LOA.

Note: This post is the opinion and property of the poster and subject to the copyrights of AMLive and cannot be used or replicated in part or whole without the expressed authorization of the poster or the Editor of AMLive.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on May 24, 2011 at 10:50am

getting it back in the database ought to be straightforward although one has to wonder how it disappeared to begin with but I'll bet the word "technology" comes to mind.

I go back and forth on the sticker but tristar also uses this approach and it's very easy to align the COA with the actual article "although we can debate the exceptions" unlike the generic ones or the ones that spell out the item but there is no image and even if there is an image is it the original image.

What would be a good solution, if there is one? Of course, PSA/DNA is set in thier ways.. so I doubt they are going to change anytime soon.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on May 24, 2011 at 6:42pm

Mike,
If your LOAs our COAs aren't in their online database, all you should have to do is call or email them and ask them to add them. I'm sure they took nothing out when Jimmy left. But keep in mind that LOAs are imaged with the item...and COAs aren't. I like PSA/DNA but I think that's a mistake. Every item should be imaged so collectors can make sure they're not counterfeit certs.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on May 25, 2011 at 4:32am

Mike ~ roger that. I would think all you have to do is mail in a copy of the LOAs (I'm presuming they are full LOAs at that). If they are still giving you problems then I'd email orlando as he is pretty good at cutting thru the red tape and bs most of the time.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on November 23, 2011 at 5:59am

On another thread I posted an anaylsis conducted on PSA/DNA certifications for Charlton Heston as in the "secretarial" signed ones that were clearly secretarial.

During that point in time with the sample size of 40, I detected 28 clearly signed secretarials that at this point a 6th Grader could identify. We have never heard back formerly or informally as far as I know on the Heston study from this specific TPA. We also know that several Top Sellers are continuing to fight the idea based solely on it having a TPA "stamp". Mostly PSA/DNA and a few JSA ones.

The error ratio however would be equal to a 70% error ratio. Of the remaining 30% or 12 there were some in the grey area as well as a possible forgery that I would personally walk away from.

It comes as no surprise as one I checked had a cert date of Jan 2011 and thus it was clear to me that the exemplar being used (AS MANY OTHER PLACES WERE ALSO BUYING INTO) was a secretarial signed one.

Hopefully, and we can only hope that they turn this around quickly. If in the future you trip across this thread and were unfortunate to land in the error ratio, act quickly to see if you can get your money back from whoever you bought it from. Getting a refund from a TPA for cert fees is most likely a hopeless cause.