Ten Coronation of KCIII 1oz silver coins with struck-through errors! What would you do?

[paulmerton]

7 minutes ago, Agaupl said:

I’m very surprised a dealer isn’t accepting at least an exchange on these given the condition. Still a chance of a error grading though?

I'm very surprised too. I certainly won't be buying anything else from them or recommending them to others again if they think it's acceptable to palm off coins like these whilst selling them for more than other 1oz silver coins.

I don't think it's really worth the gamble trying to get them graded if the outcome is uncertain, but I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that the coins should be replaced.

[paulmerton]

26 minutes ago, MBTPSilver said:

On these particular coins most dealers should be accepting returns as these are outside of the typical bullion issues, if they don't like that they shouldn't be selling them. When a dealer says it doesn't affect value that is entirely true, if you're selling to them, they'll pay the same either way, but with these coins clearly being sold as a more collectible coin most people won't be selling back to a dealer and the value would therefore be impacted by an issue like this.

Absolutely. I think it's completely disingenuous of the dealer to keep on claiming that it doesn't affect the value of the coins.

They're essentially saying that all 1oz silver coins have the same value at the end of the day - as long as you only sell them back to them. Yet they are selling these for more than other 1oz silver coins for some reason, implicitly agreeing that they are worth more due to the design on them, and their condition obviously affects that.

Otherwise, where would you draw the line - would it be acceptable to receive anonymous 999 silver blank discs instead of silver maples as long as they weigh 1oz because it's "only bullion" and it's all about the silver content?

At least they have agreed to refund me for the coins, but it doesn't seem right that I should foot the bill for returning them and that's not something I will do out of principle in this instance and I'm really disappointed that they aren't budging on that.

Anyway, it's helpful to see others also thinking that these coins should be replaced. Hopefully that will help sway the matter and save me a cool £8.95. 

I'll keep everyone posted 😎

[Agaupl]

38 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

I'm very surprised too. I certainly won't be buying anything else from them or recommending them to others again if they think it's acceptable to palm off coins like these whilst selling them for more than other 1oz silver coins.

I don't think it's really worth the gamble trying to get them graded if the outcome is uncertain, but I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that the coins should be replaced.

My dealer would replace them if they arrived Milky. Never mind physically dinged. I’ve had cheap damaged stock £2.50 above spot from them in better condition than those coins tbh. 

[paulmerton]

4 minutes ago, Agaupl said:

My dealer would replace them if they arrived Milky. Never mind physically dinged. I’ve had cheap damaged stock £2.50 above spot from them in better condition than those coins tbh. 

That's a good dealer then. All of the coins in this tube are pretty milky too. I've asked to return the whole tube as that's how they arrived. Of course, if condition doesn't matter then I suppose there shouldn't be any problem if I just stuck the 10 problem coins loose in a jiffy bag!

[paulmerton]

Didn't even get a reply from them yesterday, so I'm not sure if they're ignoring me or thinking long and hard about doing the reasonable thing.

[paulmerton]

My third email did the job. I now have an offer of a refund for both the coins and the return postage, which I believe is the right thing to do.

However, that only came about after I pointed out that I have helpfully told them about several mistakes on their website during my time as a customer, including most recently a security problem with their website. Would I have got my postage refunded otherwise? I have no idea as they didn't acknowledge any of this in any way in their reply.

This has taken more time than £8.95 is worth. I knew it would, but I'll fight for what's right, and hopefully it'll help other people in the same situation.

It's tempting to say I won't be buying from them again in a hurry, but let's face it, if they're the cheapest and it's not a tube of Royal Mint silver, who knows...

[MBTPSilver]

Glad to hear they resolved it. Now you have a solution I'd be interested to know who it was. They certainly went out of their way to make this much more awkward than they needed to.

[paulmerton]

2 hours ago, MBTPSilver said:

Glad to hear they resolved it. Now you have a solution I'd be interested to know who it was. They certainly went out of their way to make this much more awkward than they needed to.

Yes, that was annoying and I will certainly only ever buy from them as a last resort now. They've demonstrated their unreasonable side and I can only assume that's what to expect next time something similar happens. The postage ended up costing £11.15, which was more than I expected but I don't feel too bad about that now.

DM me your guesses 🤣

[paulmerton]

Some good guesses - didn't realise it was so obvious  

I have now got the refund, plus my return postage cost, plus a portion of the original postage (I bought some other bits at the same time so wasn't expecting the latter).

Right, where's the current cheapest place to get them elsewhere?  

[Minted]

Cheapest was Dancu...but his are long since sold out now.  Silvertrader still has plenty in stock, might be worth asking if he can do a better bulk deal than the standard % discounts on his website.  There is a disclaimer on them containing imperfections though, so guessing a lot of his are milky.

I was so disappointed with my 1oz silver I ended up buying a gold 1/10oz instead.  Quality is considerably better than the silver one, but it has a large scratch across the background. 🙄

[TeaTime]

It always irks me that dealers send out defective product and then use the 'bullion' response when questioned...

I sometimes wonder what the motivation is for them to accept (and pass on) damaged stock. Greed ? Laziness ? Fear ? Ennui ? Probably a bit of each.

Dealers, just send coins as per the fetching photographs on your site, not full-price seconds. 🙄

 

[MBTPSilver]

1 hour ago, TeaTime said:

I sometimes wonder what the motivation is for them to accept (and pass on) damaged stock. Greed ? Laziness ? Fear ? Ennui ? Probably a bit of each.

 

If they're buying it back they don't care about the defects, and the 'just bullion' response is therefore accurate in those cases. The issue is that plenty buy for collector purposes and to sell privately, but is it the dealer's responsibility to account for this? It would just be easier if RM could change the production process to add some QC in, but the cost would certainly rise even higher if they did.

[paulmerton]

33 minutes ago, MBTPSilver said:

is it the dealer's responsibility to account for this?

In which universe wouldn't it be a dealer's responsibility to ensure that what they're selling is up to standard? 🤣

They're not merely couriers of RM products, they're retailers of it.

 

[MBTPSilver]

38 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

In which universe wouldn't it be a dealer's responsibility to ensure that what they're selling is up to standard? 🤣

 

What is the 'standard' they should be holding it too though? I'm not saying they shouldn't, but a bullion coin is intended to be a unit produced and sold as cheaply as possible. It's a lump of metal with a design for tax benefits. That to me suggests there will be defects. It would be like buying a supermarket savers lasagne and then complaining it's not as good as the best quality range (proof coins).

If the normal standard from the mint is with scratches, milk spots etc, a dealer wouldn't necessarily be expected to do any more than offer that product at the quality received. Just raising points for discussion, I don't particularly care either way, I don't think people would be happy paying £40 for a silver Brit if that's what it took for RM to make them all to a high standard.

[paulmerton]

2 minutes ago, MBTPSilver said:

What is the 'standard' they should be holding it too though? I'm not saying they shouldn't, but a bullion coin is intended to be a unit produced and sold as cheaply as possible. It's a lump of metal with a design for tax benefits. That to me suggests there will be defects. It would be like buying a supermarket savers lasagne and then complaining it's not as good as the best quality range (proof coins).

If the normal standard from the mint is with scratches, milk spots etc, a dealer wouldn't necessarily be expected to do any more than offer that product at the quality received. Just raising points for discussion, I don't particularly care either way, I don't think people would be happy paying £40 for a silver Brit if that's what it took for RM to make them all to a high standard.

The coins don't meet RM's own published standards, i.e. similar quality to brilliant uncirculated. The mint replaces coins like these, so a dealer should too unless they are explicitly described as being below standard when sold.

[Minted]

6 hours ago, TeaTime said:

I sometimes wonder what the motivation is for them to accept (and pass on) damaged stock. Greed ? Laziness ? Fear ? Ennui ? Probably a bit of each.

I would assume a lot of buyers just accept it as they don't want the hassle of returns.  I haven't returned any PM's so far for exactly that reason, despite being less than content with the quality and condition of a few.

I just try a different retailer next time and keep any retailers I have poor experience with as a last resort in future.  I'd like to hope they'd realise what's happening and start checking coins before dispatch if enough people do that, but I also accept they may not realise the reason for reduced sales without a direct complaint.

[TeaTime]

The term 'bullion quality' is meaningless and is used far too often by unscrupulous sellers as a way of trying to abdicate any legal responsibility for supplying goods fit for purpose. Collector coins - i.e. those sold as collector items and not as circulating coinage - should, by definition, be of a quality fit for collecting. They are not called 'stacker' coins !

Any dealer selling RM products takes on the responsibility for supplying the goods as fit for purpose. That's what the profit margin is for. If they can't be bothered to check the coins before selling them on then shame on them.  If they have checked the coins, spotted the damage and still sold them with no caveats, then i refer to my earlier post - I sometimes wonder what the motivation is for them to accept (and pass on) damaged stock. Greed ? Laziness ? Fear ? Ennui ? Probably a bit of each.

 

[Stuntman]

I think that if, say, the 1oz Coronation bullion coin range was sold at the same price as bog-standard 1 oz Britannias - then fair enough, accept the coins as one unit of bullion.  But they are priced at a fairly significant premium versus a bog-standard Britannia because of their limited mintages and their one-off design.

It's a tricky one.  I also haven't returned a bullion coin that I've purchased new from a dealer or the RM (apart from one instance with the RM when the coin was completely jammed in its capsule and I couldn't get it out without risking damage to the coin.  Took more than 3 months to get a replacement and I had to chase them up several times...).

Basically I tend to accept it as luck of the draw.  Thankfully, most of what I have received has been acceptable.

 

[TeaTime]

Something that i can't get my head around is people buying i.e. Britannias from a dealer purely as bullion silver..  and paying up to 60% over spot. Buying a coin isn't investing in silver as a commodity, it is investing in a collectors item. Isn't it ?  

If i wanted to invest money in silver as a pure commodity i would be buying bent forks and wonky fish knives, not newly minted coins that will instantly lose any premium because they've arrived damaged.

It's no wonder that dealers have perpetuated the term 'bullion quality'. What is surprising though, is the number of buyers who have accepted it.  

Now excuse me, i have some forks that need straightening.

 

[AaaGee]

Ive got 2x 2023 crowned C3 coins that are damaged. Put them away straight after unpacking them and cant/wont/havnt looked at them since. Piss poor.

 

[Agaupl]

52 minutes ago, TeaTime said:

Something that i can't get my head around is people buying i.e. Britannias from a dealer purely as bullion silver..  and paying up to 60% over spot. Buying a coin isn't investing in silver as a commodity, it is investing in a collectors item. Isn't it ?  

If i wanted to invest money in silver as a pure commodity i would be buying bent forks and wonky fish knives, not newly minted coins that will instantly lose any premium because they've arrived damaged.

It's no wonder that dealers have perpetuated the term 'bullion quality'. What is surprising though, is the number of buyers who have accepted it.  

Now excuse me, i have some forks that need straightening.

 

You’re not wrong pal. Imagine if they then refused to accept a return as ‘bullion is bullion’ as has happened to one of tsf’s members. Anyone would think it’s scam. 

[Agaupl]

At the end of the day it’s not difficult.. the line between bullion and numismatic been blurred.. purposefully. If you want a basic bullion coin (say a silver Brit) you pay a minimum premium.  It’s milky on arrival but when you enquire it’s just a bullion coin.. fine. 
you buy a proof Brit.. it’s not perfect you get a replacement that may be better. But of course you’ve paid a huge premium. 
now there’s a huge semi -numismatic contingent that when they charge you are on the numi side. But any errors are passed off as ‘no it’s just bullion’ 

where do you think the main profits lie when coins atm are mass market items due to the queens death and Charles’s coronation. 

 

[stefffana]

21 hours ago, TeaTime said:

Something that i can't get my head around is people buying i.e. Britannias from a dealer purely as bullion silver..  and paying up to 60% over spot. Buying a coin isn't investing in silver as a commodity, it is investing in a collectors item. Isn't it ?  

If i wanted to invest money in silver as a pure commodity i would be buying bent forks and wonky fish knives, not newly minted coins that will instantly lose any premium because they've arrived damaged.

It's no wonder that dealers have perpetuated the term 'bullion quality'. What is surprising though, is the number of buyers who have accepted it.  

Now excuse me, i have some forks that need straightening.

 

My man!😂😂😂

[paulmerton]

Haha, typically after I've returned them, my NGC contact has eventually got back to me after speaking to their graders, who've said that they would recognise the strike-through mint error on these coins.

[JackKlugman]

I have an PCGS MS64 Morgan Silver dollar with a mild strike through error - it dot not damage the value too much in my case !

I am though tired of the Royal Mint charging a massive premium for their coins when they have quality control and milk spotting issues