And it begins.... 1 1

[Stefan_W]

Here is the story (so far) of the first ME submission I sent in after the policy changes. This is not a discussion of those changes so I figured it was safe to start a new thread.

Act I - I had two slabs with scuffing on the back and inside of the cases. There was no way of fixing them since products only do the outside so I decided to send them in for a reholder. I paid for the reholdering, CGC sent them back, and they came to me with the exact same scuffing.

Act II - I called CGC and the rep was very apologetic. I asked whether the inside sheath is changed when a reholdering takes place since the scuffing looked like it was in the exact same spots. I was assured that both the hard plastic case and the inside plastic are swapped out. I sent them back as an ME. 

Act III - I got the ME submission back and the scuffing was still there and in the same spots. In the meantime, CGC implemented the policy changes for ME submissions. I phoned in and explained the situation, and I was assured that they would fix the error this time around (I got them to make a note on their end and I included a note with the submission). They sent me a label and back it went as an ME.

Act IV - The ME submission hit the system today and I was sent a bill for 80 USD, which is over 100 CAD. I double checked the order numbers and indeed this charge was for the ME, which means I was dinged for both the ME reholders plus the shipping basically as soon as the box was opened. 

Act V - I plan to call in tomorrow to see what is going on but I am EXTREMELY upset right now. I try to be reasonable and maybe this is just an error, but I suspect it was very intentional on their part. 

Pictures attached below for reference. The pictures do not do justice to how much scuffing there actually is on the inside sheaths.  

Edited June 15, 2023 by Stefan_W

[Tcarroll17]

The true intention of the policy coming into full bloom.  $$$

[namisgr]

No scuffing with mylar sleeves and fullbacks.  

While yours is another example of bad quality control AND bad customer service, perhaps they will find the error of their ways and correct the price charge when your situation is laid out to a rep.

Edited June 15, 2023 by namisgr

[Stefan_W]

On 6/14/2023 at 10:00 PM, Stefan_W said:

Here is the story (so far) of the first ME submission I sent in after the policy changes. This is not a discussion of those changes so I figured it was safe to start a new thread.

Act I - I had two slabs with scuffing on the back and inside of the cases. There was no way of fixing them since products only do the outside so I decided to send them in for a reholder. I paid for the reholdering, CGC sent them back, and they came to me with the exact same scuffing.

Act II - I called CGC and the rep was very apologetic. I asked whether the inside sheath is changed when a reholdering takes place since the scuffing looked like it was in the exact same spots. I was assured that both the hard plastic case and the inside plastic are swapped out. I sent them back as an ME. 

Act III - I got the ME submission back and the scuffing was still there and in the same spots. In the meantime, CGC implemented the policy changes for ME submissions. I phoned in and explained the situation, and I was assured that they would fix the error this time around (I got them to make a note on their end and I included a note with the submission). They sent me a label and back it went as an ME.

Act IV - The ME submission hit the system today and I was sent a bill for 80 USD, which is over 100 CAD. I double checked the order numbers and indeed this charge was for the ME, which means I was dinged for both the ME reholders plus the shipping basically as soon as the box was opened. 

Act V - I plan to call in tomorrow to see what is going on but I am EXTREMELY upset right now. I try to be reasonable and maybe this is just an error, but I suspect it was very intentional on their part. 

Pictures attached below for reference. The pictures do not do justice to how much scuffing there actually is on the inside sheaths.  

**** UPDATE *******

I contacted customer service today and spoke with a rep who was wonderful. She checked the $80 USD charge and it was actually all shipping. The reason why I was charged is because the box was opened outside of the window even though I started the ME within a couple of business days of getting the books and I shipped them out the day after I got the shipping label. The issue is that it took more than a week for them to open up the box which pushed it out of the ME return window. I ended up getting an $80 credit which is not completely ideal but fine since I will be doing another submission in the near future anyway. 

Lesson learned that can be applied to everyone - they clearly have marching orders to be very strict about timelines so be prepared to call and present your case if there is an increased time to send books back due to being outside of the USA, delays getting the return label, FedEx taking forever, or (likely most commonly) CGC taking a long time to open up the box. Be on top of charges to your account to avoid extra charges. 

[marmat]

So CGC did not fix the error yet and manager to squeeze an extra $80 from you. I would not settle for a credit, I would ask my money back

[Tnexus]

On 6/15/2023 at 8:15 AM, marmat said:

So CGC did not fix the error yet and manager to squeeze an extra $80 from you. I would not settle for a credit, I would ask my money back

100% agree. That's a very dangerous precedent they're setting. If anything it should be a refund AND credit.

Edited June 15, 2023 by Tnexus

[Stefan_W]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:15 AM, marmat said:

So CGC did not fix the error yet and manager to squeeze an extra $80 from you. I would not settle for a credit, I would ask my money back

I see your point but it honestly did not matter much to me since I am preparing another submission anyway and the credit will be used within within the window for Visa interest charges. Long story short - not fighting that battle when I know it does not cost me anything in either direction. 

[shadroch]

A well trained customer is a business's dream.

[manetteska]

On 6/15/2023 at 8:32 AM, Stefan_W said:

On 6/15/2023 at 8:15 AM, marmat said:

So CGC did not fix the error yet and manager to squeeze an extra $80 from you. I would not settle for a credit, I would ask my money back

I see your point but it honestly did not matter much to me since I am preparing another submission anyway and the credit will be used within within the window for Visa interest charges. Long story short - not fighting that battle when I know it does not cost me anything in either direction. 

That is why they won't change.

[Stefan_W]

On 6/15/2023 at 11:40 AM, manetteska said:

That is why they won't change.

If you want to believe that it is your prerogative, but being reasonable is not a sin.  

[manetteska]

On 6/15/2023 at 11:05 AM, Stefan_W said:

On 6/15/2023 at 10:40 AM, manetteska said:

That is why they won't change.

If you want to believe that it is your prerogative, but being reasonable is not a sin.  

Huh?

You keep sending them books (and re-sending them books) and paying and accepting credit instead of your actual money back...what incentive do they have to change any of their absurd business or QC practices?

Fourth time's the charm?

[Gaard]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:09 AM, Stefan_W said:

I ended up getting an $80 credit which is not completely ideal

Were you given the option between credit or refund?

 

On 6/15/2023 at 9:09 AM, Stefan_W said:

Be on top of charges to your account to avoid extra charges. 

This is actually good advice, and not just for CGC's bonehead errors.

I just want to point out ... you caught the error. How many do you think didn't? I think CGC should rethink this whole ME/2 week thing as far as charging people. It should have absolutely nothing to do with when the box was opened. I wonder if the receiver at CGC who opened your box was named Angel.

[Stefan_W]

On 6/15/2023 at 4:19 PM, Gaard said:

Were you given the option between credit or refund?

I was not, but as I said earlier I am planning on sending in another submission shortly so it made no practical difference to me. I cannot say one way or the other what would have happened if I pressed for a refund. 

[wombat]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:09 AM, Stefan_W said:

.The issue is that it took more than a week for them to open up the box which pushed it out of the ME return window.

@CGC Mike This seems like a massive problem. What is the clock on the 14 days exactly? When you fill out the form online? When the box is received? When the box is opened?

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 6/15/2023 at 5:29 PM, wombat said:

@CGC Mike This seems like a massive problem. What is the clock on the 14 days exactly? When you fill out the form online? When the box is received? When the box is opened?

I have the same question.  Mike previously stated that the customer had 2 weeks to fill out the form.  

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

On 6/15/2023 at 5:29 PM, wombat said:

@CGC Mike This seems like a massive problem. What is the clock on the 14 days exactly? When you fill out the form online? When the box is received? When the box is opened?

 

[Tnexus]

On 6/15/2023 at 4:29 PM, wombat said:

@CGC Mike This seems like a massive problem. What is the clock on the 14 days exactly? When you fill out the form online? When the box is received? When the box is opened?

My guess it was left deliberately vague and up for interpretation. I imagine it's 14 days from contact for those that push back, and 14 days to back in CGC's hands for those for that don't.

I remember having to argue with CS over an ME newton issue about a year ago because they said it wasn't returnable, and the only reason they allowed it was because I had literally link them the updated policy posted on these forums.

[CGC Mike]

On 6/15/2023 at 5:29 PM, wombat said:

On 6/15/2023 at 9:09 AM, Stefan_W said:

.The issue is that it took more than a week for them to open up the box which pushed it out of the ME return window.

@CGC Mike This seems like a massive problem. What is the clock on the 14 days exactly? When you fill out the form online? When the box is received? When the box is opened?

Customers that have received their submissions back from CGC have 14 days to fill out an online submission form by selecting the mechanical error option.  After the 14 days are up, the OSF will not allow the customer to submit a ME.  Here is the article Which shows what qualifies as a ME, among other details:

 

CGC’s Mechanical Errors / Returns Policy

Posted on 5/16/2023

Effective May 16, 2023, CGC has updated its Mechanical Errors policy for clarity and consistency.

Certified Guaranty Company® (CGC®) accepts returns in certain instances, such as when the CGC submitter receives a collectible back with a typographical error on the label or an obvious scratch on the outside of the holder. These returns are called Mechanical Errors on the CGC online submission form.

Many of the Mechanical Error submissions that are received by CGC do not qualify because they have issues caused by improper packing, storage or handling (such as drops), have naturally occurring Newton’s rings (explained below), or have label information that was correct at the time of grading. As a result, CGC has updated its Mechanical Errors returns policy for clarity, consistency and efficient processing.

Effective May 16, 2023, all Mechanical Error submissions, regardless of error, must be returned to CGC within 14 days of the submitter’s receipt of the collectible. In addition, returns can only come from the original submitter of the collectible. (Note: If you are submitting through a CGC Official Submission Center, CGC Authorized Dealer or CGC Facilitator, please contact them to make a return, or contact CGC Customer Service directly.) Newton’s rings, which can occur naturally under certain conditions, do not qualify as a Mechanical Error.

Valid Mechanical Error submissions are not charged shipping, insurance or handling fees if the return is made within 14 days of the submitter’s receipt of the collectible. If CGC determines that a Mechanical Error submission is within its quality acceptance criteria, however, the submission will be returned in its original holder, and roundtrip shipping fees will be charged to the submitter.

Mechanical Errors represent a very small (and declining) percentage of overall submissions due to CGC’s efforts to improve quality control through enhanced training and processes to better prevent or catch mistakes. These efforts have not only improved quality control, but also turnaround times, which are at the fastest speeds in years. CGC continues to work diligently to both reduce the occurrence of Mechanical Errors and maintain fast turnaround times.

What qualifies as a Mechanical Error?

There are two types of Mechanical Errors:

• Label defects
• Holder defects

Label defects

Certain issues with the CGC label qualify as Mechanical Errors, such as incomplete information on the label, inaccurate or missing data or the wrong label stock was used; for example, a comic book that received a Universal grade, which should have been encapsulated with the Universal Blue label, was instead incapsulated with the Green Qualified label.

In the case of a label defect, CGC will relabel and reholder the collectible at no cost to the submitter if the customer completes a Mechanical Error return submission within 14 days of receiving the collectible.

Holder defects

Obvious scratches, scuffs and/or blemishes in or on either the outer holder or inner holder that cannot be safely removed qualify as Mechanical Errors. Certain debris, such as obvious dust, loose particles or other material that is not naturally shed by the collectible itself, is also considered a holder defect that is submittable as a Mechanical Error.

Optical distortions or effects, such as Newton’s rings, rainbows or other prismatic effects (see below), that are natural phenomena related to light passing through the outer holder, inner holder or a combination of the two are NOT considered holder defects, and do not qualify as Mechanical Errors. Neither do scratches, scuffs or blemishes on the inside of the inner holder (if used) that were caused by contact with the collectible.

In the case of a holder defect, CGC will relabel and reholder the collectible at no cost to the submitter if the customer completes a Mechanical Error return submission within 14 days of receiving the collectible.

Why don’t Newton’s rings qualify as a Mechanical Error?

Newton’s rings are the natural result of two pieces of plastic coming together. They may be more or less pronounced depending on the thickness of the collectible. The CGC holder is built with long-term preservation in mind, and its construction is necessary to ensure the protection of the encapsulated collectible. Newton’s rings are not an indicator of any deficiencies with the CGC holder and therefore do not qualify as a Mechanical Error. For more information about Newton’s rings, watch the video below.

 

[Stefan_W]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:13 PM, CGC Mike said:

Customers that have received their submissions back from CGC have 14 days to fill out an online submission form by selecting the mechanical error option.  After the 14 days are up, the OSF will not allow the customer to submit a ME.  H

In this case the online submission form was filled out I believe 5 days after I got the books back. I may be off by a day or so, but it was definitely under a week. I was charged anyway, and when I called the customer service rep immediately saw the error and gave me a credit for the charge. I was initially very upset, but it was dealt with promptly so all good on my end. 

I do agree that some things may need to be ironed out with this new policy, unless I am the only person this has happened to in which case it was just simple human error. 

[CGC Mike]

Well, I am here to help if anyone is not able to work things out with customer service.