Is reasonable ask Baldwin's auction for a refund for a misdescribed coin?

[JJH]

It's like this. I purchased lot 580 items from baldwin's auction 113.https://baldwins.co/en-GB/auction#/lots/e1b31e87-e97b-42a6-b845-768222b04315?department=BDW&lot_status=all&auction_uuid=5cec2514-7637-4f39-b576-3be0db39d6ad

The item is 1820 geroge IIII proof halfcrown.

------------------------------------------

I'm digressing here. After I completed the payment, I waited until the payment deadline passed and found that I didn't receive the items. During this period, FEDEX can I went back and forth about 3 times. At that time, I logged into my account and found that the invoice said that I had not paid. I immediately wrote to inquire and sent other letters asking them to explain or take responsibility. The only letter I got was that the payment was completed and sent by the system. Of course, every letter I sent before the auction received an immediate reply. If you go to GOOGLE to read their comments, yes, the longest one was written by me

--------------------------------------------

Now back to the topic, this is my first time to come into contact with proof old coins. Of course, I have no experience, but I have asked them to take more detailed photos for me. I guess those should be real proofs. The first two photos are in the attachment.(The following was taken after I got the coins.) , and they have several coin experts, and it’s a large auction so it shouldn’t be wrong. At that time, I thought

OK, the coin came back from NGC. To be precise, I will receive it on Thursday, but the number is 6655103005 62
I confirm that it is my coin, but MS, in my understanding, MS and PF are the craftsmanship during casting and have nothing to do with wear and tear, etc. However, NGC gave MS
Now can I ask BALDWIN for a refund? Of course I have sent them letters, but I have a feeling they will ignore any letters from me again. Is my request reasonable? Because their terms seem to indicate that any of the descriptions are not there The scope of their responsibilities (of course I also deeply understand that they are not willing to take responsibility at all), whether such a clause can really exempt them from liability, because I read an article a while ago

https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/worlds-most-expensive-coin-fake-provenance-roman-eid-mar-1234659762/

They were caught falsifying sources and smuggling. It seems that the terms they describe are not exempt from liability. Should I call the police if they are unwilling to give any response?

[arphethean]

A very nice coin, but sadly not a proof. A proof is struck to a much higher standard and on a different level altogether in terms of the details and the  surfaces.

It's night and day!

https://www.sovr.co.uk/products/george-iv-1821-proof-halfcrown-pf64-heavier-garnished-reverse-cm06336

 

They could have got away with saying prooflike as there is some fabulous lustre and field contrast there, but it's not a proof strike.

I would certainly be calling up Baldwins and returning for a full refund.

If they value their reputation they will do it immediately, no questions asked.

Edited March 4 by arphethean

[arphethean]

I have twice had auction houses misdescribe items. In the first instance it was also a specialist coin auction, describing a rare silver proof panda as "as struck" where it had hairlines all over it. The other was a local auction house. In both cases a refund was offered. Shockingly in the first instance they stood by their description that the coin was as struck but gave me a refund anyway. 

[JJH]

17 minutes ago, arphethean said:

I have twice had auction houses misdescribe items. In the first instance it was also a specialist coin auction, describing a rare silver proof panda as "as struck" where it had hairlines all over it. The other was a local auction house. In both cases a refund was offered. Shockingly in the first instance they stood by their description that the coin was as struck but gave me a refund anyway. 

I also think so, but I have doubts since they mistakenly delayed and did not give me any reply, and after all, it took many months for NGC to come back.

[JJH]

22 minutes ago, arphethean said:

A very nice coin, but sadly not a proof. A proof is struck to a much higher standard and on a different level altogether in terms of the details and the  surfaces.

It's night and day!

https://www.sovr.co.uk/products/george-iv-1821-proof-halfcrown-pf64-heavier-garnished-reverse-cm06336

 

It seems that I still need to learn more, because my eyes do look proof, and I even feel that the PF64 you posted is a bit cameo.

[arphethean]

Two details to differentiate these - the details of the rose - lots of definition absent entirely from your circulation coin. Also look at the teeth - no border outside the teeth on the proof. 

A circulation coin showing cameo is common if it has had very little contact

[JJH]

So their own exemption clause is not really legal?

[arphethean]

I don't know the answer to that. However, for me it is a wider question than strictly one of legality.

They surely aim to run an enduring business in which trust and expertise is a cornerstone. Mistakes happen in any business and if they put their hands up and make it right this is no issue. It's the metric by which I judge any business - how they handle issues. It might incur a small loss on their part to put it right. But if they dig their heels in and refuse a refund, and thousands of people (prospective buyers and sellers) on the internet find out about it the cost to their business will be far higher.

So regardless of the time it takes after the auction for the issue to come to light they should put you right. Everyone knows that NGC typically take 3-4 months to grade a coin and this shouldn't have a bearing on the outcome.

I have seen this exemption phrase in the Ts and Cs of many auctions so it probably is legal but they will be using it more as a disclaimer to protect themselves against bad actors, than a worked policy.

Edited March 4 by arphethean

[JJH]

ok i have sent email to their   Abigail Delgado(Auction Manager, Coins)    Jordan Connelle(Head of Auctions Operations) &  the customer service mailbox still have no reply after 4 hours. i ready email to 

Neil Paisley(Managing Director, Coins)

[Mrpound]

I really do hope you get a refund as the bottom line is , it’s not a proof coin, that’s what you were sold that isn’t what you got 👎 it dose look proof like but not a proof, I wish you luck in getting a full refund 🙏

[Mrpound]

I don’t know price ranges of English coins, what would this coin be worth ms62 compared too a pf62?

[arphethean]

About a third of this price

[Mrpound]

1 minute ago, arphethean said:

About a third of this price

Ouch 😣 

[JJH]

The current development is that even their coin director does not respond to EMAIL, but the good news is that FB responded to me, but she clarified the matter from the beginning and when I contacted them, and did not mention the consequences of the coin description error.

[jultorsk]

Be polite and patient. You have a case here as the coin was misdescribed as Proof, and Baldwin's should know better. Give them three days to sort this out to your favor, then send a gentle reminder and mention BNTA.

[JJH]

9 minutes ago, jultorsk said:

Be polite and patient. You have a case here as the coin was misdescribed as Proof, and Baldwin's should know better. Give them three days to sort this out to your favor, then send a gentle reminder and mention BNTA.

Yes, you are right. I was impatient. After all, the first time I collected classical coins, I encountered delays and ignored letters. And the result now really makes me angry. But at that time, before the results of Jinri MS came out, I had already The matter at that time is put aside, as long as the coin is not wrong and has a beautiful blue color, then I will be happy.

[Wampum]

Baldwins are usually really good at sorting things out, albeit in there own time.

The coin it not a Proof, it is definitely Proof Like, and a possible early strike, however as mentioned above you have the two main factors, the centre of the rose, and the rim teeth,  

you can also tell by the edge lettering and how each letter is not so well defined  as it would be in a Proof.

I would also look at a possible reduction of fees or credit towards their next auction to cover the cost for NGC       

Edited March 4 by Wampum

[JJH]

5 minutes ago, Wampum said:

Baldwins are usually really good at sorting things out, albeit in there own time.

The coin it not a Proof, it is definitely Proof Like, and a possible early strike, however as mentioned above you have the two main factors, the centre of the rose, and the rim teeth,  

you can also tell by the edge lettering and how each letter is not so well defined  as it would be in a Proof.

I would also look at a possible reduction of fees or credit towards their next auction to cover the cost for NGC       

I can't really make out the edge fonts. It seems to me that it's just not sharp enough due to more wear and tear.

[JJH]

Okay, now after FB notified their director, the director's reply is: No one except the director has received my letter, and

"NGC and PCGS are well known for making mistakes in regards to currencies and proofs, one example is an 1821 Proof TERTIO crown i sent for grading to NGC. An 1821 Crown with the TERTIO edge only exists as proof, they did not make currencies with this edge year. Of course they graded it as MS63. I sent the coin back pointing out their error and they still graded it MS63 not a proof. The coin was obviously a proof and as I mentioned with this edge can only be a proof.
The grading companies make many mistakes when it comes to British coins."  This is the original sentence  Even though they still think it is a proof coin

The best news is that they are willing to refund your money

[JJH]

thankyou again for all😂 Especially for detailed comparison instructions  @arphethean @Wampum

[arphethean]

7 minutes ago, JJH said:

Okay, now after FB notified their director, the director's reply is: No one except the director has received my letter, and

"NGC and PCGS are well known for making mistakes in regards to currencies and proofs, one example is an 1821 Proof TERTIO crown i sent for grading to NGC. An 1821 Crown with the TERTIO edge only exists as proof, they did not make currencies with this edge year. Of course they graded it as MS63. I sent the coin back pointing out their error and they still graded it MS63 not a proof. The coin was obviously a proof and as I mentioned with this edge can only be a proof.
The grading companies make many mistakes when it comes to British coins."  This is the original sentence  Even though they still think it is a proof coin

The best news is that they are willing to refund your money

Disappointing they do not acknowledge their obvious mistake and instead point the blame at NGC. But good that you have been offered a refund.

[dicker]

Hi All

This is great thread for anyone considering buying at auction.  My thoughts are:

1. Use your own wits and resources to research any coin you are buying. Don't blindly trust the description / photo.

2. I agree that auction houses don’t always get it right - both mis-describing some coins and missing critical details / “sleepers” that they are selling. Sometimes even selling counterfeits….  Always bid know  if what you are buying and limits.

3. Don’t be out off by a grand name if you need to complain.  They are just a company and need to deal fairly with you - Auction houses need and want to maintain a decent name to stay in business.

4. Complain politely and follow up.  I don’t ever complain on email.  I write a letter - I find this much more effective.

Best

Dicker