ASM #252 CGC 9.8 Record Sale - something fishy going on? - Holder Tampering Incident confirmed by CGC 50 50

[comix4fun]

On 12/21/2023 at 6:32 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

this is getting juicy enough, it's time to phone a friend. @comix4fun can you parse this debate? I see criminal liabilities as questionable at best. Civil is a maybe, but who is liable and who is the injured party?

Dear Lord....35 pages. 

Who's covering my hourly?  
Nobody? Well I can fly in without reading the first 32 pages, so I apologize if anyone hit these points. 

To get to where we can even attempt to discern who's on the hook for what, we'd need to know:
1) the full chain of custody of both the legitimate Hulk 181 and the MVS-amputated Hulk 181 from the time they sold on eBay (as a timeline benchmark to the last time they were in proper holders publicly documented)
2) the full time-line of the purchase of each book and if they changed hands at all in the time from the eBay sale to the time the MVS-less 181 went to CGC. 
3) if this is all same person or parties engaging in this behavior, or unrelated parties.
4) that may help us to determine if there are two books still out there with the same serial number (i.e. the label and holo were faked) or this is the same original label placed with the incomplete book.  THIS ONE is important as it opens a can of worms and adds dozens of questions.

What I don't know if anyone mentioned is if the person who submitted the MVS-shorn Hulk 181 did so knowingly with the intent and mental state to create a falsely graded item, they have likely committed criminal fraud (of course), but they also have run afoul of the law on a federal level no less, it matters little that CGC wasn't the ultimate financial "victim" of their fraud.

If (and it's a BIG "if" given how many links in the chain have to be confirmed) they committed an intentional action of deception, in order to induce another to act in a manner they would not have sans the deception, and they did so with an ultimate goal of financial gain with the deception as a necessary and indelible manner to reach that financial gain, and they used a telephone, the internet, the US mail system, or any commercial parcel carrier to carry out these actions they would be guilty of a separate count of wire and/or mail fraud for each call, communication, transaction, submission, shipment, or return shipment induced by their original action. 

This is likely far more serious a set of circumstances, dependent on the full fact pattern, than just the simple act of the person they eventually duped into buying the wrongly graded book. 

Again, apologies if this has already been covered. There's a lot we don't know but I see this as incredibly serious and, if the facts bear it out, criminal on a wide-range of offenses. 
 

[paqart]

On 12/21/2023 at 8:16 AM, RonS2112 said:

You aren't wrong in any of this, but the above seems to gloss over a simple point: the weak link and underlying enabler in all of this is that the CGC process allows this to happen.  

You are right that the seller in all liklihood has malicious intent in carrying out this scam.  BUT -- if it came down to a legal case, I would think he could easily claim that: a) he was simply submitting a book with a flaw, and it isn't HIS fault that CGC gave it a blue 9.0 label instead of a green 8.5 label and b) it isn't HIS fault that people will pay a premium for a book with that blue 9.0 label.

I mean, taken to a (admittely ridiculous) extreme, people are looking for grade bump-ups all the time by cracking, re-pressing and resubmitting, and at least part of that is hoping for a more lenient grader than the book might have had the first time around.  And often, it works.  How far removed is this scam from that practice?

Except, this isn't what happened. The books got switched at the seller's end. That isn't an innocent mistake. There is no way for that to happen accidentally or through laziness, inattentiveness, or even sheer imbecile stupidity.

[paqart]

On 12/21/2023 at 8:17 AM, sledgehammer said:

The distinction is that Ebay could not have done anything differently to prevent this.

No one is saying eBay is responsible for this on the criminal end of this. However, their agreements do indemnify buyers from this kind of harm. Therefore, they do have to give a refund to the buyer. Now, eBay is the victim and can go after CGC or the seller for redress. That is what is going on here.

[mephistopheles]

CGC better hope he was the only one pulling this scam. They should track down all the cert #s this guy submitted and offer free re-grading and reimburse anyone who was scammed. CGC clearly failed here. The scary thing is if this is more widespread.

[MyNameIsLegion]

On 12/21/2023 at 9:37 AM, paqart said:

   On 12/21/2023 at 6:49 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

but that is all that matters. He didn't sell it to CGC. On the contrary, he paid them some fee to perform a service. Again, where's the fraud? He may have violated some terms of use if there is any such fine print by manipulating the slab and CGC not recognizing this, but it's not criminal. 

 

Yes, it is. He sold a forgery. Making and selling forgeries is a crime. He sold them on eBay. EBay may not be responsible for the fraud, but they are holding the bag when the customer wants a refund and the seller disappears. EBay has a cause of action (civil) against CGC for guaranteeing something that wasn't authentic, and against the seller for recovery of the refund given the buyer. The police have a criminal case against the seller for forgery, counterfeiting, and fraud, though the counterfeiting and interstate nature of the crime may kick it up to federal jurisdiction.

yes, when he sold it. I was questioning if the mere act of submitting the swapped book to be reholdered to CGC qualifies as fraud towards CGC.  Some posters were demanding CGC break out the pitchforks and nukes. I was contending that between the scammer and CGC alone, did any kind of fraud occur?

[drotto]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:48 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

yes, when he sold it. I was questioning if the mere act of submitting the swapped book to be reholdered to CGC qualifies as fraud towards CGC.  Some posters were demanding CGC break out the pitchforks and nukes. I was contending that between the scammer and CGC alone, did any kind of fraud occur?

That is a little harder. I would say yes, because they are swapping out books with the intent of increasing the value for a future sale.  CGC in the reholder process can reasonably expect the book in the case is the book they put in the case, and the submitter is giving it to them and essentially claiming it is the actual book that belongs in that case. That is deception leading to fraud. The person swapping it trying to fool CGC by knowingly exploiting a loophole. 

Yes, CGC as "experts" could also be liable because the experts should catch the deception.

[Diane Sauer]

On 12/21/2023 at 8:10 AM, sledgehammer said:

This is more than that.

What evidence do you have to back up that claim?

[paqart]

On 12/21/2023 at 9:52 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

again, to be criminally fraudulent, the devil is in the details.  

• If I crack, press,and clean an old blue label 9.0 Hulk #181 and resub and get back a 9.6 is that fraud? No.
  • If I sell the above, is that fraud? No.
  • if the pressed book shrinks back to it's original imperfections and it no longer appears as a 9.6 and I sell it, is that fraud? No.
• If I send in a Hulk #181 with a missing MVS and by some miracle they don't catch it and I get a blue label 9.6 is that fraud? No.
  • If I sell the Blue label hulk #181 with the missing MVS on ebay is that fraud? Depends.
    • If I listed it as a blue labelCGC 9.6  Hulk 181,well that's what it is. Says so right on the label. NOT FRAUD
    • If I listed it as a a blue labelCGC 9.6  Hulk 181 and stated in the listing that the MVS is intact. THAT'S FRAUD.
• If I send in a Hulk #181 with a missing MVS that I slipped into another blue labeled slab for a reholder or custom label and I get a blue label 9.6 is that fraud? Maybe? I contend no, because you aren't selling it to them, you are paying for a service from them. If you trick them into giving you a better grade that it deserves you're a bad person, it might violate some CGC terms of use, but it's not criminal.
  • If I sell the Blue label hulk #181 with the missing MVS on ebay is that fraud? Depends.
    • If I listed it as a blue labelCGC 9.6  Hulk 181,well that's what it is. Says so right on the label. NOT FRAUD
    • If I listed it as a a blue labelCGC 9.6  Hulk 181 without a missing MVS. THAT'S FRAUD

Remind me to never buy from you. Case in point: I sent in a (modern) FF 24, $2.29 price variant. CGC graded it as a 9.0. As far as I can tell, CGC damaged the comic during the encapsulation process, causing the cover to become detached. Therefore, it is not a 9.0, though the label says it is. CGC said I could return it for regrading and refund, but this particular comic is not easily replaced. It isn't worth much, but is ridiculously rare. They would have a very hard time finding a copy in any condition to replace it with, let alone a 9.0. For that reason, though I am unhappy about it, I have decided to let it go and keep it as-is. I have left it in the slab for the sake of convenience, protection, and I don't know how to open a slab without causing further damage. However, if I were to sell it, I'd have to take it out of the slab. Putting a warning on an ad that it isn't really a 9.0 isn't good enough, because an unscrupulous person could then sell it as a 9.0. Therefore, I have to eat the loss on the grading fee and the damage to the comic, in addition to the trouble of getting it out of the holder, to prevent anyone else from misrepresenting the comic.

 

[MyNameIsLegion]

On 12/21/2023 at 9:44 AM, comix4fun said:

Dear Lord....35 pages. 

Who's covering my hourly?  
Nobody? Well I can fly in without reading the first 32 pages, so I apologize if anyone hit these points. 

To get to where we can even attempt to discern who's on the hook for what, we'd need to know:
1) the full chain of custody of both the legitimate Hulk 181 and the MVS-amputated Hulk 181 from the time they sold on eBay (as a timeline benchmark to the last time they were in proper holders publicly documented)
2) the full time-line of the purchase of each book and if they changed hands at all in the time from the eBay sale to the time the MVS-less 181 went to CGC. 
3) if this is all same person or parties engaging in this behavior, or unrelated parties.
4) that may help us to determine if there are two books still out there with the same serial number (i.e. the label and holo were faked) or this is the same original label placed with the incomplete book.  THIS ONE is important as it opens a can of worms and adds dozens of questions.

What I don't know if anyone mentioned is if the person who submitted the MVS-shorn Hulk 181 did so knowingly with the intent and mental state to create a falsely graded item, they have likely committed criminal fraud (of course), but they also have run afoul of the law on a federal level no less, it matters little that CGC wasn't the ultimate financial "victim" of their fraud.

If (and it's a BIG "if" given how many links in the chain have to be confirmed) they committed an intentional action of deception, in order to induce another to act in a manner they would not have sans the deception, and they did so with an ultimate goal of financial gain with the deception as a necessary and indelible manner to reach that financial gain, and they used a telephone, the internet, the US mail system, or any commercial parcel carrier to carry out these actions they would be guilty of a separate count of wire and/or mail fraud for each call, communication, transaction, submission, shipment, or return shipment induced by their original action. 

This is likely far more serious a set of circumstances, dependent on the full fact pattern, than just the simple act of the person they eventually duped into buying the wrongly graded book. 

Again, apologies if this has already been covered. There's a lot we don't know but I see this as incredibly serious and, if the facts bear it out, criminal on a wide-range of offenses. 
 

thank Chris. OK, I concede any of my arguments on the last 3 pages. Hey I'm not a lawyer, and I don't think I've stayed at a Holiday Inn Express in the last 5 years. 

[Kevin76]

Looks like we have a Jason Ewert 2.0  going on  

[MatterEaterLad]

On 12/21/2023 at 8:47 AM, mephistopheles said:

CGC better hope he was the only one pulling this scam. They should track down all the cert #s this guy submitted and offer free re-grading and reimburse anyone who was scammed. CGC clearly failed here. The scary thing is if this is more widespread.

THIS. 

How long has this guy been running this scam? Is it just this one account? Is it a group of people? Is there someone within CGC who is complicit? There are so many unanswered questions. Has CGC even offered a "We're aware of the situation and are looking into it"?

[MyNameIsLegion]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:03 AM, paqart said:

Remind me to never buy from you. Case in point: I sent in a (modern) FF 24, $2.29 price variant. CGC graded it as a 9.0. As far as I can tell, CGC damaged the comic during the encapsulation process, causing the cover to become detached. Therefore, it is not a 9.0, though the label says it is. CGC said I could return it for regrading and refund, but this particular comic is not easily replaced. It isn't worth much, but is ridiculously rare. They would have a very hard time finding a copy in any condition to replace it with, let alone a 9.0. For that reason, though I am unhappy about it, I have decided to let it go and keep it as-is. I have left it in the slab for the sake of convenience, protection, and I don't know how to open a slab without causing further damage. However, if I were to sell it, I'd have to take it out of the slab. Putting a warning on an ad that it isn't really a 9.0 isn't good enough, because an unscrupulous person could then sell it as a 9.0. Therefore, I have to eat the loss on the grading fee and the damage to the comic, in addition to the trouble of getting it out of the holder, to prevent anyone else from misrepresenting the comic.

 

I"m not condoning any of the scenarios I detailed where the buyer is deceived into believing that the book matched the grade on the slab. It's patently unethical  Heck, I'm squeamish about pressing really being permanent, and the book reverting to a lesser grade after the fact. I was arguing if each scenario was technically fraud. The lawyers here have weighed in that it is- as have you. 

Edited December 21, 2023 by MyNameIsLegion

[ThothAmon]

On 12/21/2023 at 11:06 AM, Kevin76 said:

Looks like we have a Jason Ewert 2.0  going on  

Imagine the world we’d live in if all of these schemers and flim flammers put the same energy into positive endeavors? Unregulated markets bring out the worst so buyer beware. 

[drotto]

On 12/21/2023 at 11:03 AM, paqart said:

Remind me to never buy from you. Case in point: I sent in a (modern) FF 24, $2.29 price variant. CGC graded it as a 9.0. As far as I can tell, CGC damaged the comic during the encapsulation process, causing the cover to become detached. Therefore, it is not a 9.0, though the label says it is. CGC said I could return it for regrading and refund, but this particular comic is not easily replaced. It isn't worth much, but is ridiculously rare. They would have a very hard time finding a copy in any condition to replace it with, let alone a 9.0. For that reason, though I am unhappy about it, I have decided to let it go and keep it as-is. I have left it in the slab for the sake of convenience, protection, and I don't know how to open a slab without causing further damage. However, if I were to sell it, I'd have to take it out of the slab. Putting a warning on an ad that it isn't really a 9.0 isn't good enough, because an unscrupulous person could then sell it as a 9.0. Therefore, I have to eat the loss on the grading fee and the damage to the comic, in addition to the trouble of getting it out of the holder, to prevent anyone else from misrepresenting the comic.

 

Correct, anybody with knowledge that a product is not what is being sold as is potentially guilty of fraud.

 

Going back to the counterfeit money senerio.  If I get passed a fake $100 bill, if I discover it is fake and still try and use it, I am potentially liable.  If I discover the fraud, I am expected to take the article to the authorities so it can be investigated and taken out of circulation.

[VintageComics]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:44 AM, comix4fun said:

If (and it's a BIG "if" given how many links in the chain have to be confirmed) they committed an intentional action of deception, in order to induce another to act in a manner they would not have sans the deception, and they did so with an ultimate goal of financial gain with the deception as a necessary and indelible manner to reach that financial gain, and they used a telephone, the internet, the US mail system, or any commercial parcel carrier to carry out these actions they would be guilty of a separate count of wire and/or mail fraud for each call, communication, transaction, submission, shipment, or return shipment induced by their original action. 

This is likely far more serious a set of circumstances, dependent on the full fact pattern, than just the simple act of the person they eventually duped into buying the wrongly graded book. 

Again, apologies if this has already been covered. There's a lot we don't know but I see this as incredibly serious and, if the facts bear it out, criminal on a wide-range of offenses. 

 

On 12/21/2023 at 6:30 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

I see lots of talk about how this guy is going to jail,  eBay, CGC, the USPS, FBI, the Canadian Mounties, MI6 all all mounting a joint investigation to take this guy down. 

umm, no. None of that will happen. Not even a remote possibility. The only "Fear" that briva3 has now that his current accounts are "outed" is he's thinking to himself  "dude what a major hassle" and he's not going to bank an easy 20-30k this month Now he has to set up a new eBay ID and CGC account possibly. 

Do you still feel this way?

Now stop insulting the Canadian Mounties. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/21/2023 at 11:15 AM, ThothAmon said:

Imagine the world we’d live in if all of these schemers and flim flammers put the same energy into positive endeavors? 

Now you're starting to sound like me. 

On 12/21/2023 at 11:15 AM, ThothAmon said:

Unregulated markets bring out the worst so buyer beware. 

Dude, we live in an era where our AUTHORITIES, the people who are supposed to be our leaders and examples are openly corrupt. It didn't used to be that way. The world is upside down and needs a correction, and the only way that happens is with lots of hard work, from the ground up, through families and communities and working upward.

[paqart]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:48 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

yes, when he sold it. I was questioning if the mere act of submitting the swapped book to be reholdered to CGC qualifies as fraud towards CGC.  Some posters were demanding CGC break out the pitchforks and nukes. I was contending that between the scammer and CGC alone, did any kind of fraud occur?

I'm not sure how that would play out. If CGC was any other kind of company, it would be possible to say CGC was "defrauded" in the sense that they were involuntarily induced to become party to a crime through deception. Literally, that seems to be what happened. However, because they are a "guarantee" company, whose sole mission is to certify authenticity and grade, it is much more difficult to claim innocence even if they are innocent. The reason is that they are claiming that each item graded by them is carefully examined to ensure grade and authenticity. That could not have happened in the present circumstance.

The only way CGC can be fooled by the fraudster is if they are not performing the service they say they are performing. The distinction between "grading" and "reholdering" doesn't fly here. At least, I don't think it does, because reholdering without checking grade and authenticity means they cannot guarantee the comic that goes into the new holder. Ergo, they aren't performing the service they are paid to perform. More than that, by not performing the service in these limited situations, the value of all legitimately graded slabs is called into question. 

This could be used to pursue fraud charges against CGC. Not because they knew this was going on, they likely didn't. The reason is that they had to know they weren't performing a secondary check of reholdering comics, and that invalidates their guarantee. That much, they had to know. I don't see a way around it.

[MyNameIsLegion]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:18 AM, VintageComics said:

 

Do you still feel this way?

Now stop insulting the Canadian Mounties. 

I don't know firsthand just how much $$$ this guy has made selling slabs, or how many were not legit. If one of the buyers filed a criminal complaint that might set the wheels in motion. I don't know if CGC would initiate it or not, that's why I kept asking if they were themselves an injured party affected by the deception and could file criminal charges or take it to civil court.  I think that CGC would be reluctant to really put themselves out there unless subpoenaed to do so because it's all bad press for them that would become public record.   

[mephistopheles]

I recently heard about a blue Hulk 181 that was cracked for cpr and was missing the stamp. CGC said they wouldn't cover the loss because they didn't crack open the holder, a presser did. I think CGC is in for a world of legal hell.

[ThothAmon]

On 12/21/2023 at 11:24 AM, VintageComics said:

Now you're starting to sound like me. 

Dude, we live in an era where our AUTHORITIES, the people who are supposed to be our leaders and examples are openly corrupt. It didn't used to be that way. The world is upside down and needs a correction, and the only way that happens is with lots of hard work, from the ground up, through families and communities and working upward.

I’ve been buying comics since the mid seventies and they’ve always been there.