I dropped my soap in GrahamCrackers shower

[Primetime]

Stories like this just make we want to get out of the hobby entirely and move on to something else.

 

 

sigh.

 

Why? The end result favors the customer as much as possible.

 

Listen, if you've been in this hobby long enough, you'd bought at least one, if not multiple, restored books that were not disclosed to you as such. A small percentage was intentional; the by product of a dishonest dealer, but the majority was likely accidental. At worst, the fault lies in the fact that a dealer either 1). doesn't have the time to screen every book thoroughly himself, or 2). has to employ people without the pre-requisite skills to catch a well done resto job with great consistency.

 

The point is not that it happens, but how the dealer responds when it does.

 

I've recounted the story of how I bought a FF # 52 from Greg White that was a sure fire 9.4, if it wasn't for the well done CT that I only detected after I left the poorly lit room the Tampa convention was housed in. When I immediately returned to Greg's table that day and requested a refund, he told me he would offer me credit and take the book back. Keep in mind, I paid cash...$350 to be exact, just an hour earlier. Now, I like Greg, and will talk with him for a couple of minutes when I see him at a show...but there's no way I'll ever buy a high grade book from the man again.

 

In comparison to that story, the offer by GrahamCrackers to exchange the book two years after the fact is very generous indeed.

 

Even CGC, with all their expert eyes and resto checks, still gets one wrong on occasion. It happens. It's what happens afterward, how the situation is handled, that's more important.

 

 

The details of the tale are not the issue. Its the negativity that is interjected into the hobby and the forums based solely upon the way these stories are presented.

 

I haven't read anything here that leads me to believe anyone was intentionally dishonest but it sure makes me look at all my books with a less than favorable light and begin to question their virginity....for lack of a better term. Just takes some of the fun out of it all.

 

When you say all the negativity, you are talking about only the restored books that are complained about. You are not referring to all the positive transactions that people have, and there are literally 1000's.

 

It's a bit of a stretch when you take on incident and try to extrapolate it to encompass the entire hobby. No matter where you go you will have poo and honey.

 

This is a great hobby with tons of terrific people in it.

 

(thumbs u

 

Jamie Graham is a stand up guy...period (thumbs u . I sold Jamie $7000.00 dollars worth of books in Chicago this year, upon returning home I found my bank to be ultra conservative with his out of state check. My bank wanted to put a 10 day hold on the funds, I called Jamie...that same day he took the time out of his schedule and wired the funds to me immediately because I needed them right away.Healso sold my buddy a TEC #29....there was a small error in disclosure, he fixed it immediately with a very large adjustment in the price. I really don't like the name of this thread ....this type of approach is not what I would prefer to see here on the boards.

[Hamlet]

The timeframe is what makes it a more difficult decision.

 

However, in this case, GrahamCracker knows that they sold them the book, and there is not much doubt that it was restored when it was sold, do to the scans and the fact that the OP paid to have it CGC'ed. There is very little chance that the OP is running a scam.

 

When a dealer can be pretty sure that they sold a restored book as unrestored, I expect them to make an effort to address the situation. If it had been 2 months, I would expect GrahamCracker to give cash back. After two years, I think store credit is a reasonable offer.

 

As far as the purchaser bearing responsibility for not acting, I'm not sure that you can ask them to act until they become aware that they have been sold a restored book. The fact that the OP wasn't aware that he had been sold a misrepresented book should not invalidate his claim when he does become aware of it.

 

As the years go by, it becomes harder to be certain of the facts of the transaction, but in this case, no one is really disputing them.

 

 

 

Interesting perspective.

 

We always want to see a fair an equitable result, but that is going to be different in every case.

 

In this case the TWO YEAR time gap is what makes equity a difficult proposition. Does a purchaser bear no responsibility for their own actions or failure to act? None? What if the purchaser waited 10 years would the equitable thing still be 100% in his favor? It's a slippery slope leading to an impossible standard for sellers that will ultimately be exploited by the less than honest buyers in the world.

 

I suggest you take a quick peek at the legal/equitable concept of "Laches", it may lend some insight as to how failure to act, to sit and wait without action have been treated. Equity is not served to opening the door to creating unlimited responsibility to sellers and removing all responsibility from buyers and letting them, basically, do anything or wait forever and still be entitled to recover completely despite their negligence.

 

Best,

Chris

 

 

 

 

GrahamCracker sold a restored book to the OP 2 years ago. When the OP brought it to their attention, they basically said "tough luck, its been too long for you to bring that book back".

 

John Robinson explained his reasoning for that decision. It is not an unreasonable decision, but if I was the OP, I would be extremely upset with it. As a potential customer, I would be less likely to do business with GrahamCracker knowing that they would be willing to burn a customer like that. Remember, the OP had been wronged by GrahamCracker. I'm sure it was completely unintentional, but the OP was still left with a PLOD book that GrahamCrackers had sold him as unrestored.

 

[szelim]

This thread needs an obligatory shower scene.

 

 

End of interlude - now back to the main story.

 

[FlyingDonut]

Not sure how to follow that....

 

But the original poster, and the other poster, aren't telling ALL of the story - they're telling the part of the story that shows them in the best light possible.

[Bomber-Bob]

I want to point out that posting this matter on the Boards helped the OP get his offer of credit from GCC. Same with the Mound City thread, as it got us an offer of a partial refund on shipping. The Boards obviously have leverage, we should be happy about this. The Boards work.

Also, I don't think Jamie and GCC's reputation has suffered on account of this.

A lot of people(including myself) stood up for Jamie. We found out it was John Robinson's call and he explained himself. I believe all is well here. Let's be happy.

[Theagenes]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

[nearmint]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

 

"Jeff, it's come to our attention that, on company time, you've been viewing young, voluptuous, cartoon women taking showers in the forest. What do you have to say for yourself?"

[BaltimoreLauren]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

 

"Jeff, it's come to our attention that, on company time, you've been viewing young, voluptuous, cartoon women taking showers in the forest. What do you have to say for yourself?"

 

This is like my dream awkward conversation I'd love to have at work one day.

[Ares]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

 

"Jeff, it's come to our attention that, on company time, you've been viewing young, voluptuous, cartoon women taking showers in the forest. What do you have to say for yourself?"

 

I'm testing to make sure my monitors colour depth perception is working and there are no dead pixels?

[Theagenes]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

 

"Jeff, it's come to our attention that, on company time, you've been viewing young, voluptuous, cartoon women taking showers in the forest. What do you have to say for yourself?"

 

I'm testing to make sure my monitors colour depth perception is working and there are no dead pixels?

 

Yep, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[MoundCityAuctions]

I want to point out that posting this matter on the Boards helped the OP get his offer of credit from GCC. Same with the Mound City thread, as it got us an offer of a partial refund on shipping. The Boards obviously have leverage, we should be happy about this. The Boards work.

Also, I don't think Jamie and GCC's reputation has suffered on account of this.

A lot of people(including myself) stood up for Jamie. We found out it was John Robinson's call and he explained himself. I believe all is well here. Let's be happy.

 

Regarding the Mound City thread, many of the comments from the board (in particular those not involved in the auction, ie bidders) were counter-productive. The threats, the noose, and that other junior high stuff did not motivate me to solve the problems caused by my shipper. What did work is the reasonible people on the board who contacted me (many through PM's) or called (Roy) and my refunding to any bidder via credit card or check not credit in a future auction (and not just Roy, had nothing to do with how much Roy spent. If that was the case I would have just offered the deal to Roy and nobody else.

 

I find email and message boards do not compare to a good old fashion phone call. Of couse that only works when a truck has not hit the only fiber optic cable in town!

[MrBedrock]

The threats, the noose, and that other junior high stuff...

I think junior highs will find it offensive to be compared to threats and a noose.

[divad]

Whoa, not safe for work! Thank god I'm the only one here right now.

 

"Jeff, it's come to our attention that, on company time, you've been viewing young, voluptuous, cartoon women taking showers in the forest. What do you have to say for yourself?"

 

This is like my dream awkward conversation I'd love to have at work one day.

 

Now that's a

[divad]

I'm glad I overlooked both this and the infamous "MoundPity" threads . . .

[gaz973]

I want to point out that posting this matter on the Boards helped the OP get his offer of credit from GCC. Same with the Mound City thread, as it got us an offer of a partial refund on shipping. The Boards obviously have leverage, we should be happy about this. The Boards work.

Also, I don't think Jamie and GCC's reputation has suffered on account of this.

A lot of people(including myself) stood up for Jamie. We found out it was John Robinson's call and he explained himself. I believe all is well here. Let's be happy.

 

Regarding the Mound City thread, many of the comments from the board (in particular those not involved in the auction, ie bidders) were counter-productive. The threats, the noose, and that other junior high stuff did not motivate me to solve the problems caused by my shipper. What did work is the reasonible people on the board who contacted me (many through PM's) or called (Roy) and my refunding to any bidder via credit card or check not credit in a future auction (and not just Roy, had nothing to do with how much Roy spent. If that was the case I would have just offered the deal to Roy and nobody else.

 

I find email and message boards do not compare to a good old fashion phone call. Of couse that only works when a truck has not hit the only fiber optic cable in town!

 

That is how message boards go but it's hardly surprising that Mound City suffered a backlash here since there were so many people with issues and they could get no response through conventional means. If you don't like negative reactions then maybe you should leave someone contactable after a big auction, to deal with problems that may arise. If you don't want to be offended by negative reactions then maybe you should respond to people before it gets to that stage.

 

BTW, person who posted the noose already said more than once that it was meant as a joke. While it may not have been funny, you seem to take it far more personally than it was intended.

[MoundCityAuctions]

For anyone who hasn't already figured this out, I'll spell it out for you. There WAS contact information for an alternate contact posted in the Mound City thread. By me. After we returned from the NAA conference, I posted a message in the thread notifying people that I (Rob Lite) was going to be working on resolving the shipping and handling issues, the refunds, and contacting those who hadn't bothered to pay for their items in the first place, while Rob Classic and Tina went off for a well earned vacation.

 

When they arrived in New Mexico, and lost touch due to the truck ramming the Verizon tower, I made note of it, leaving my personal contact info posted publicly to the board.

 

When their trip was cut short due to a close family friend shooting himself, I posted AGAIN and made certain that anyone who frequented the board, could read the English language, and had access to a telephone could reach me.

 

I think that in total, I received about 2 calls, maybe three from people about their shipping troubles during this entire period of time. We've taken care of many, many refunds for people. Those who paid with checks initially, and could not have their credit cards processed for refund by our software, have been issued checks refunding portions of their shipping fees. And while I agree that our company is ultimately responsible for our choices in regards to who handles the shipping, I'll take this opportunity to point out that we did not set the prices for the shipping, and have taken up the responsibility of processing refunds to those who were overcharged. Not only that, but we've publicly stated that any and all future comic auctions we handle will feature free shipping. Free.

 

If anybody can still seriously complain about this situation, and particularly about the steps we've taken to rectify the shipping problems, I personally think they may be delusional. If you haven't gotten your refund yet, it is most likely on its way to you already via USPS.

[Foolkiller]

I think that's a rather skewed and one sided account of the events and hardly accurate. Sounds like excuse making. But I didn't bid in the auctions and will leave it for those that have complaints to voice them. After much consternation, it does sound like refunds are at long last being issued.

[MoundCityAuctions]

What, precisely, are you claiming as lacking accuracy?

 

We started processing the refunds once we were made aware of the situation, and once people were able to provide us with copies of the charges placed on their accounts by the shipper. We've settled issues related to books that were mishandled and damaged.

 

With as low as the expectations were for the auction among the board members here initially, I don't think I'm off base saying that we absolutely handled the actual auction itself fine. Our 502 world records on individual prices state that clearly enough. If the only serious complaints are directed at the shipping, and you yourself have admitted that not only have we taken the right steps to correct them, and have, in your words, started issuing refunds "at long last", then what, exactly, is your complaint? Is explaining the circumstances considered to be excuse making?

 

If you wish, I could play devil's advocate for a moment, and tell you what I think we could have done better.

 

It was a mistake to hand off the shipping to a third party. It seems to work pretty well for furniture, glassware, antiques, art, small collectibles, coins, and thousands of other things we've sold in the past, but in the future, we will be certain to handle the shipping of comics in a different, more efficient manner, in house.

[Green]

What, precisely, are you claiming as lacking accuracy?

 

We started processing the refunds once we were made aware of the situation,

For the first month or so werent you only trying to offer credit?

[divad]

Are you Rob1 or Rob2? I'm confused I thought your name was Rob Classic, now you ID yourself as Rob Lite. Call me crazy, but this name-changin' routine of yours gets me a-wonderin'

 

Neither of which sound like real last names . . .

 

Oh, and btw, why are you here?