Passes eBay Authentication, then Fails and gets Decertified by PSA

[RL 1953]

Originally Posted by zworykin

For what? Did you follow the thread?

yes I did. the buyer got scammed when he bought the card. since it is
to late to file on ebay, CC chargeback is his best option

[Silent George]

honestly, how confusing all of this from the scammers to the company's that are supposed to be adding integrity to the market place - I just can't believe people continue to trust any aspect of this hobby. It definitely has reduced my spending in it tenfold.

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by RL 1953

yes I did. the buyer got scammed when he bought the card. since it is
to late to file on ebay, CC chargeback is his best option

If he doesn't want to have that eBay account anymore, sure.

[auburn35]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

Guessing he means because the original seller sold the twitter guy a supposed illegitimate slab, and it's too late for standard ebay INAD claim.

What does the twitter guy do in this situation? Strange situation to be in.

Illegitimate slab is always a possibility but I don't think the deactivation has been fully explained.
eBay only noted the cert was deactivated and PSA had to return the card.

Humorously, the seller claims that eBay CS tried to suggest PSA certs have an expiration date.

Anyways, the seller expects to have the card returned tomorrow, maybe that will provide additional info.
As part of this program, does PSA deactivate certs for case damage?

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by RL 1953

yes I did. the buyer got scammed when he bought the card. since it is
to late to file on ebay, CC chargeback is his best option

What was the scam?

[cholodolo]

Absolutely shocked to find PSA's lack of transparency is an issue here...

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by Silent George

honestly, how confusing all of this from the scammers to the company's that are supposed to be adding integrity to the market place - I just can't believe people continue to trust any aspect of this hobby. It definitely has reduced my spending in it tenfold.

Who ever said eBay authentication was meant to improve integrity? It was meant as a way to reduce returns on eBay and to pass liability onto buyers.

Buyers do benefit from PSA ensuring slabs haven't been tampered with and are genuine. But that also helps PSA protect their brand and the valuations of their graded cards.

[DragonWagon]

I figured it out. https://www.blowoutforums.com/showth...3#post18657653

[Bosoxfan5990]

Originally Posted by DragonWagon

I figured it out. https://www.blowoutforums.com/showth...3#post18657653

Exactly as I suspected here https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...7&postcount=12. You found the evidence. Nice work!

A shady seller with 14K feedback. Nice. How do we get eBay to "kick him off the tour, Doug?"

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Satan

Kind of bananas. The PSA cert look up is public. The reason why certs are pulled down should also be public. Transparency is key. What does eBay/PSA have to hide here?

So scammers cant use any details to improve their methods and keep scamming. It's happening and worrisome.

[DynaEtch]

Wow just saw the other thread. From the eBay perspective, I still think this is the way to go for miscategorizations

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

I wonder if eventually ebay will change the way they handle these and just send the miscategorized item back to the seller, cancelling the transaction. Might spare some confusion.

The people in the other thread debating the AG checkmark badge on those listings- yes it’s a bit deceptive. eBay probably technically gets out of anything because you can click on the ‘Learn More’ and it takes you to the full page, including FAQs and fine print, and does say only single cards eligible. Also- and I have no idea how this was not seen here- they make it clear when an item such as a lot bypasses by miscategorization: the language in the package says so, no blue holder, you also get an email saying so. Also when it does this, that alone is grounds for INAD- because the listing described it having AG. I’d be curious how eBay handles this situation and what buyer options are.

While the twitter guys post was probably meant to put blame on eBay AG program, ironically this is an example where it helped- the fraudulent slab was caught by it and this brought to attention- the one time it was actually going through AG. If the twitter guy kept it without selling it and having it go through AG, he may not have known.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

Wow just saw the other thread. From the eBay perspective, I still think this is the way to go for miscategorizations



The people in the other thread debating the AG checkmark badge on those listings- yes it’s a bit deceptive. eBay probably technically gets out of anything because you can click on the ‘Learn More’ and it takes you to the full page, including FAQs and fine print, and does say only single cards eligible. Also- and I have no idea how this was not seen here- they make it clear when an item such as a lot bypasses by miscategorization: the language in the package says so, no blue holder, you also get an email saying so. Also when it does this, that alone is grounds for INAD- because the listing described it having AG. I’d be curious how eBay handles this situation and what buyer options are.

While the twitter guys post was probably meant to put blame on eBay AG program, ironically this is an example where it helped- the fraudulent slab was caught by it and this brought to attention- the one time it was actually going through AG. If the twitter guy kept it without selling it and having it go through AG, he may not have known.

So then eBay should allow the buyer to return the card and be refunded -- the 3-day return window shouldn't matter because it was a scam perpetuated on eBay's platform, facilitated and documented by them.

Otherwise, the AG program and the 3-day return policy are just ways to prevent returns and put more liability on buyers.

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

While the twitter guys post was probably meant to put blame on eBay AG program, ironically this is an example where it helped- the fraudulent slab was caught by it and this brought to attention- the one time it was actually going through AG. If the twitter guy kept it without selling it and having it go through AG, he may not have known.

Do you think Twitter guy feels good about it? Maybe he only made the purchase because he thought it was coming with the AG. Maybe he didn’t know he could return the item after receiving based solely on it being miscategorized. Maybe he didn’t see the paper saying it didn’t go through the AG program. Maybe the paper wasn’t included.

[Allen Ginter 99]

Sounds like what happened to me

My card was not authenticated and it was covered in dust and crap when I received it. It still came in the autheticator box but I got a letter saying they don’t authenticate game used cards / book cards anymore


This program is absolute garbage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Do you think Twitter guy feels good about it? Maybe he only made the purchase because he thought it was coming with the AG. Maybe he didn’t know he could return the item after receiving based solely on it being miscategorized. Maybe he didn’t see the paper saying it didn’t go through the AG program. Maybe the paper wasn’t included.

This.

eBay should point out clearly to the buyer that they can initiate a return of the items within three days. They should also provide a disclaimer that the items were not authenticated and therefore it is the responsibility of the buyer to determine their authentication.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

So then eBay should allow the buyer to return the card and be refunded -- the 3-day return window shouldn't matter because it was a scam perpetuated on eBay's platform, facilitated and documented by them.

Otherwise, the AG program and the 3-day return policy are just ways to prevent returns and put more liability on buyers.

If AG never even existed, twitter guy could have bought the lot, never known the better after those 3 days of INAD window, and be in this same position. What does ebay do in this situation? Idk...never been in it. I would hope there is some kind of recourse he could take here. AG isnt even really the factor in the first case since it bypassed (yes people are saying the checkmark is on the listing, but that was addressed). Is it possible a buyer misses all the documentation from ebay saying it wasnt authenticated? Apparently, but some of that is on the buyer not seeing it. Perhaps ebay could at least put in bold letters on the listing page next to the AG checkmark that miscategorized items such as lots will not be authenticated and sent on. Or do what I said above....just send them back to the seller.

Edit:

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

This.

eBay should point out clearly to the buyer that they can initiate a return of the items within three days. They should also provide a disclaimer that the items were not authenticated and therefore it is the responsibility of the buyer to determine their authentication.

They do provide this, both in the package and in an email sent to your email address connected with your ebay account. I've received several miscategorized packages in the past from AG. For example, at the beginning of the program, 'sketch' wasnt keyword blocked form the program, and they dont authenticate original art cards, so whenever a sketch card above the threshold was purchased, it would be sent on from AG with that documentation.

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Do you think Twitter guy feels good about it? Maybe he only made the purchase because he thought it was coming with the AG. Maybe he didn’t know he could return the item after receiving based solely on it being miscategorized. Maybe he didn’t see the paper saying it didn’t go through the AG program. Maybe the paper wasn’t included.

Since twitter guy doesnt seem to understand how AG works (such as lots not being eligible), and missed that it wasnt in the AG box or noticed the email, Im highly skeptical this just happened to be a package ebay for some reason didnt include any paper or document when they always include that. Very likely he just didnt notice/discarded the packaging contents to get to the cards.

No, I dont think he should feel good about it, that is not what my post was implying- hopefully there is some kind of recourse he can take for such an obviously documented scam. This would be a special case and should contact ebay (although granted it's very hard to get anyone at ebay familiar enough with deep-cut trading card stuff like this). And if not that, then CC chargebacks if paid with CC or avenues outside ebay etc.

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

They do provide this, both in the package and in an email sent to your email address connected with your ebay account. I've received several miscategorized packages in the past from AG. For example, at the beginning of the program, 'sketch' wasnt keyword blocked form the program, and they dont authenticate original art cards, so whenever a sketch card above the threshold was purchased, it would be sent on from AG with that documentation.

Yep. It's pretty crystal clear, if you take the ten seconds to READ it.

Your order is on the way, but won’t come with our Authenticity Guarantee

Hi [zworykin],

We wanted to let you know that your order (below) is on the way, but unfortunately we can’t provide the Authenticity Guarantee you were expecting. The item was miscategorized when it was listed and isn’t eligible for this service. We know this may be disappointing and we’ve contacted the seller to let them know about the error in their listing. If you have any questions or concerns, please just get in touch. We’re here to help.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Yep. It's pretty crystal clear, if you take the ten seconds to READ it.

Yep. Was just gonna post this from my inbox (same thing)



This is what they send you when it is miscategorized. I mean some of this is on the buyer for not seeing all this clear language. That’s just my opinion. Not saying there shouldn’t still be recourse for being scammed though.

[hairysasquatch]

Totally broken system - all of it - PSA, eBay should just tear it down and start over.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

If AG never even existed, twitter guy could have bought the lot, never known the better after those 3 days of INAD window, and be in this same position. What does ebay do in this situation? Idk...never been in it. I would hope there is some kind of recourse he could take here. AG isnt even really the factor in the first case since it bypassed (yes people are saying the checkmark is on the listing, but that was addressed). Is it possible a buyer misses all the documentation from ebay saying it wasnt authenticated? Apparently, but some of that is on the buyer not seeing it. Perhaps ebay could at least put in bold letters on the listing page next to the AG checkmark that miscategorized items such as lots will not be authenticated and sent on. Or do what I said above....just send them back to the seller.

The main problem I have with eBay's AG program is they claim during checkout of AG listings that the item(s) will get authenticated. What it should say is the item(s) may get authenticated if it meets certain requirements. That way buyers will be prompted to read the fine print of the terms and conditions and determine whether or not an item will get authenticated.

Without some correction in the information eBay gives buyers during checkout, they are complicit in deceiving buyers who buy items that improperly have the AG logo. They need to make it clear to buyers, in conspicuous fashion, that a listing may not actually qualify for AG even though it has the logo.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Yep. It's pretty crystal clear, if you take the ten seconds to READ it.

All the email says is the item doesn't qualify for AG. It doesn't say that PSA didn't examine the cards to determine authenticity -- that's a big difference.

It's not unreasonable for buyers to assume fake slabs would be caught by PSA when they are in their possession.

eBay should specifically say the slabs weren't authenticated and the buyer can initiate a return within 3 days .

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by hairysasquatch

Totally broken system - all of it - PSA, eBay should just tear it down and start over.

No -- it's probably an easy fix. People on this board recognized the problem from the start. For some reason, eBay didn't properly address it.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

Yep. Was just gonna post this from my inbox (same thing)



This is what they send you when it is miscategorized. I mean some of this is on the buyer for not seeing all this clear language. That’s just my opinion. Not saying there shouldn’t still be recourse for being scammed though.

Put yourself in the shoes of these buyers. They paid for the cards thinking they got a solid deal by buying a lot. They waited for the cards to be shipped to and be processed by PSA for authentication. When they finally get the cards in the mail, the slabs look intact and legit. When you look at it this way, it's perfectly reasonable for a buyer to not want to return the cards even though they didn't get authenticated.

This scammer knows what he's doing.

[MoreToppsPlease]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

No -- it's probably an easy fix. People on this board recognized the problem from the start. For some reason, eBay didn't properly address it.

Yes, the seller should just pay a penalty since they’re at fault. The penalty would be a little less if the buyer still wants the item.

In any event sellers constantly miscategorize on purpose, and not just with cards.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

All the email says is the item doesn't qualify for AG. It doesn't say that PSA didn't examine the cards to determine authenticity -- that's a big difference.

It's not unreasonable for buyers to assume fake slabs would be caught by PSA when they are in their possession.

eBay should specifically say the slabs weren't authenticated and the buyer can initiate a return within 3 days .

Idk this is getting into somewhat pedantic territory imo. The email, and documentation inside the package say it does not come with Authenticity Guarantee because it's miscategorized. How anyone interprets that as it's authenticated like the twitter guy did is beyond me (although I suspect he didnt even bother to open the email/read the document in the package). Ebay Im sure will say their 'Learn More' link to the fine print on every listing right next to the badge has all the details, which I suspect few buyers read.

If you are calling for more obvious wording on the listing page, Im all for it. That said, a buyer should realize it didnt go through and get authenticated based on all the verbiage. Im not blaming the buyer for being scammed with illegitimate slabs- that's unfortunate and could happen to anyone- when I said it's somewhat on the buyer I meant just for thinking it was authenticated, not the being scammed part. Again, without the AG program at all, this same scenario could feasibly happen- seller sells lot of PSA slabs- turns out to be not legitimate- buyer doesnt know within the 3 day window- eventually figures out slab isnt legit. What ebay AG did here is actually what it's supposed to do- recognized the slab is fraudulent in the second transaction, and save the second buyer from purchasing a fraudulent slab, decertifying the slab from circulation. This is a benefit of having AG in place if anything.