Professional Sports Authenticator

In his original complaint, the customer wrote that PSA could not determine the authenticity of his autographs, but we just want to reiterate that this
is incorrect. We did make a determination and it was our opinion that these
autographs were not real.  When this is the case, PSA has provided the
service requested and paid for in full, and therefore, a refund is not valid.
We do not refund fees simply because the customer is upset about the outcome
and/or our opinion. This is, after all, why he submitted the items to us: for
our expert opinion. As mentioned before, if for some reason our
experts are not able to provide an opinion on an autograph, PSA will simply
zero out the fees and not charge the customer. However, once again, this did not
occur with this particular order because the autographs he submitted were
simply not authentic.
Our Customer Service Manager has spoken to this
customer several times and attempted to explain our process and the results,
but we cannot alter the facts: the autographs were not authentic. PSA examined the items and provided
results, and therefore a refund is not in order.

PSA (along with PSA/DNA) is a third-party authentication service for various types of collectibles. People submit items to our firm seeking our opinion of the items as it relates to their authenticity and, sometimes, quality. In our 25 years in the hobby, PSA has processed over 25 million cards and...

collectibles with a cumulative declared value of over a billion dollars. We are the preferred choice of collectors, dealers, and auction houses worldwide.In addition to providing a formal authentication service, PSA also offers an online “Quick Opinion” service – wherein a customer may request a quick opinion from our authentication experts regarding a specific auction lot listed online. If there are characteristics that the authenticator questions based on the image(s) provided in the lot, it is possible that we will deem it “likely not genuine.” However, if the autograph appears to be authentic based on what they can gather from the provided image(s), we would deem it “likely genuine.” Ultimately, in either case, the authenticators can only provide their candid reaction to an image (not the item itself) and so they provide exactly what we advertise: a “quick” opinion. If the customer wishes to get to get a formal assessment of the signed item(s) in question at that point, then it must be submitted to our offices for the signature to be examined in person. This is the only way we can run the item through the full authentication process and provide a certificate, letter, or guarantee of authenticity.In this complaint, the customer is upset because there was a change in opinion after our experts saw the signed items in person. However, PSA clearly details on our website that the quick opinion service is not guaranteed and further states that a change of opinion can occur upon submittal of the signed item (as we are now looking at the signature in person versus via an image). Here is a direct link to these details on our website for reference: http://www.psacard.com/store/t-quickopinion.aspx.In this case, the customer received the services paid for in full and even received an additional courtesy review from our staff after the fact. PSA has gone above and beyond to work with this customer, but a refund of services rendered is not in order given what the quick opinion service is intended for and based on the information we provide on the service beforehand.

I would like PSA to at the very least investigate my claim that the cards were damaged and/or. Instead of responding that it is impossible to have happened. Thanks[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved. I hope the business responds to the response more quickly as I'm prepared to take the next legal action if it requires to do some more research and possibly finding more customers that finds this flow in your grading. 
Regards,
[redacted]

PSA is a third-party authentication service for various types of collectibles. Customers submit items to our firm seeking our opinion of the items as it relates to their authenticity and, sometimes, quality. In our 25 years in the hobby, PSA has processed over 25 million cards and collectibles with...

a cumulative declared value of over a billion dollars. We are the preferred choice of collectors, dealers and auction houses worldwide PSA/DNA is a division of PSA, which was founded in 1998 in response to widespread counterfeiting, forgery and piracy of autographed collectibles. Since its inception, PSA/DNAhas become the world's leading third-party authentication service for autographs and memorabilia. Our company takes great pride in the invaluable service it provides the industry; however, given our standing in the hobby, we also see a vast number of items pass through our doors and, unfortunately, data entry and/or inputting mistakes can and do happen on occasion as they do at any company. Certainly these instances are few and far between, but human error is simply a reality in any working environment. With that said, PSA/DNA has communicated with the complainant directly in regards to his item, which was inaccurately issued a Letter of Authenticity. PSA/DNA has taken full responsibility for the error and has refunded the complainant his authentication and shipping fees. The customer is the original submitter, therefore PSA/DNA is only liable for the amount that he paid to have the item authenticated as is indicated under the Terms and Conditions listed on the customer’s submission form. Furthermore, because PSA/DNA is committed to maintaining strong customer relations, we have attempted to go the extra mile by offering the customer an additional $1500 credit with our company as a gesture of goodwill. Despite such efforts, the customer has unfortunately refused to accept PSA/DNA’s resolution and has proceeded to file a series of bad reviews on several online outlets, including the Revdex.com, and threatened legal action without any merit. Based on our efforts to date, and the complainant’s refusal to acknowledge or accept those efforts, we feel there is no further reasonable action we can take and we consider this matter closed.  Please feel free to contact me directly should you have any further questions.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID[redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
PSA's response did NOT in anyway comment or explain in detail about how an order I submitted on June 13th got done first but an order I sent a month prior on may 12th got done last. . About half of my complaint was pointing out how does one submission get skipped over for another.  Did PSA just totally ignored that? The only thing PSA goes into was turnaround times and I'm well aware they are only estimates and I have stated that in my complaint. The issue with PSA turnaround times is they do not have any guide lines or policy stating how long after the turnaround times does it become overdue or unacceptable? For example what happens if it's 20 days past their estimated turnaround time, or 30, or 50, or 6 months or a year? It is up to their discretion if they want to compensate the customer with a voucher and always hiding behind the policy their turnaround times are estimates. . The perception of this turnaround time is they can take as long as they want without pressure to complete the order in a reasonably time frame. In regards to my order I submitted on may 12th getting skipped over for my second order I submitted on June 13th there is NO excuse. I get told from a email from Veronica Lopez is that some packs take longer. I didn't get any more details then that. The same packs, the same sports and same years on both orders but some take longer?.........This is the most unacceptable part in all this. For this to happen is a reflection of how PSA manages, handles and prioritizes. Skipping over a order the perception of that seems they pick and choose.  You already have an example of that with PSA's response only choosing to answer in regards of turn around times and NOT addressing my complaint of skipping over my first order to complete the second one.
Regards,
[redacted]

PSA acknowledged the initial error and has made attempts to correct it. However, the customer is now disputing charges for services that were in fact rendered (the authentication of his items), and per company protocol, this issue must be resolved before any further action is taken. Our Customer Service Manager has already attempted to resolve the matter with the customer directly – which means refunding the amount ($50) for the service not rendered, performing the service as a courtesy provided we can obtain photos of the items in question, and even offering a voucher for $50 on top of this for any inconvenience he experienced. The customer is asking for more than PSA is liable for at this point and is not willing to accept our reasonable and fair offer. Therefore, we consider this matter closed.

Revdex.com:Thank you so much for all your help.  Your help has been extremely appreciated, as I could not have accomplished the same results myself.    I do not think a call to them would have done much, theytold me in January 2015 that I was banned from doing business with them after I complained about my damaged item.  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and PSA does now have my Population Report correct, and I will consider this complaint resolved.My complaint never did question PSA's registry.   That was correct for my items.  But as PSA acknowledged,  the Population report for 5 of my items was not correct (had been removed).The data was there is early 2015,  and I found it be be removed on December 6 th, 2015.  On January 9th, it was correct again.   They reinstated the data quickly seemingly without too muchtechnical difficulty.   I would not have thought this to be related to a complaint except I did read about another PSA customer who said the same thing.I am just glad this has been corrected, and hopefully no other PSA customers find this to be an issue in the future. I plead with the Revdex.com to not close my complaint about the damaged item without PSA providing either details of when the damage was first seen (process step and date) as well asthe state of my item when it was shipped from New Jersey and received in California or a summary of their findings and rationale to their investigation between December 24 th,2 015 and December 29, 2015 in which they made a claim that they did not damage my item.  There must be a strong rational to their claim.They keep wanting to close this without providing any details, rational, or evidence.I keep asking myself:Why will PSA not provide any details, rational, or evidence?Why will PSA not commit to stating the condition of my item when it was shipped from New Jersey or received in California?Why will PSA not state the first date and process stop they have 100 % confirmation of damage?Why did PSA refuse to submit this claim to their insurance company for review?Why does PSA not trust the review and inspection their own employee performed on September 12 th, 2015 when they took care and custody of my item?  I hope the Revdex.com agrees that a company they accredit should answer to details and not just state a customer's complaint has no merit.Thank you so much.  One closed,  one more to go.I can only assume my damage item also met with technical difficulties, but this time one they do not care to admit.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Do you think it would be too much for PSA to respond with a statement as to when (date) and where (what process step) damage was first noted on my item.Or state:Can PSA please state their detailed finding and conclusions of the investigation of this ticket including the date and process step where damage was first noted.I am very frustrated with PSA as they only have made a statement that my claim of PSA damaging my item has no merit (and that is all they have ever stated),yet I met with a PSA employee in person, and that employee did an initial review and assessment of my item at an In-Take meeting in Woodbridge, NJ.  At thatmeeting no damage was noted, and PSA took care and custody of that item at that time.I really am confused as to how they can state no merit to my claim under this situation.  If an in-person inspection, review, and assessment by their own employeeis not an acceptable means to provide evidence of no damage prior to a handoff of care and custody, then what is.I would appreciate your opinion in how to handle such a matter.  Have you seen this happen where an in-take and change in care in custody is done in person, yetthe company refuses to address a claim of damage.Maybe PSA would also answer:Why doesn’t PSA accept it’s own highly-trained employee’s initial inspection, review, and assessment of said ticket on September 12 th, 2014 as a means to the conditionat the time PSA took care and custody of this ticket?Thank You[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.They admit they received the package on May 31st.  They then admit them accepted and started their service on 6-6-2016.  This shows they took 6 calendar days to get started on my order.  They tell this to everyone and it must stop.  Ten day returns must equal 10 day returns.  For the record no representative ever called me back.  I will be calling my bank to file a dispute of charges.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Can the Revdex.com help me further with this complaint.  I am still working to resolve with PSA.This was PSA’s response to my complaint of a damaged item.Can the Revdex.com help me in two regards:1.        PSA held my item in their New Jersey office starting on September 12 th, 2014 when I personally handed it to them.A few days later they shipped my item to their California office.  It was received and documented as such on either Sept 16 th or Sept 18 th.I do not think it is unreasonable for PSA to make a statement as to the condition of my item when it was received in California on Sept 16 th or Sept  18 th.Can the Revdex.com help me make PSA make such a statement?This would be a huge help to narrow down if the damage likely occurred in their New Jersey office or their California office.2.       PSA claims to have camera data to support their claim, can the Revdex.com help in asking them to produce such data.When such a statement is made,  they should be asked to produce such evidence.FYI,  I will be adding another complaint on this company.  As a result of my damage claim, PSA/DNA Authentication Serviceshas taken an adverse retaliation action against me. One part of the data that PSA/DNA Authentication Services complies is a Population Report.  This Population Report is defined as a complete listing of every itemgraded since the inception of their business.   However, in my case, due to my complaint, PSA/DNA Authentication Services made a decision to delete the data from5 of 8 of my paid submitted items from their Population Report.   Pertinent data has been removed and now reads “Set not found”. The entire integrity of their population report comes into question if they can make decisions to delete data to their choosing, and especially in the case of anycustomer complaint.  This is blatant bullying of customers.  Complain and we will delete your pertinent, critical data.  The population report is a gauge for theentire world’s collector base, and is used to make judgments on value based on scarcity or abundance, but if the integrity is not maintained, how can the world’scollector base trust this data and trust PSA/DNA Authentication Services?  Now the validity and authenticity of 5 of my items comes into question.  If I sell them, and the Population Report reads “Set not found”, who will believe they are real?Buyers would be skeptical of the authenticity if PSA/DNA Authentication Services reputation and data is believed.Someone needs to take a stand and have them stop this retaliatory action against customs which at the same time undermines the credibility of their Population report.I am really starting to wonder if they also damaged my ticket as a retaliation against a first complaint I made about the grading of a possible $ 10,000 item.  Every since I questioned howthey graded a possible $ 10,000 items,  I have dealt with a series of issues from damage to deleted data.  I have never felt so bullied in my life.
Regards,
[redacted]

To whom this may concern:This customer reached out to the PSA Customer Service staff a week ago and we are currently investigating his claims. As soon as our investigation has been concluded, PSA will reach out to discuss the results with the customer directly.In the meantime, we just ask for his...

patience while we look into the matter further. Regards,[redacted] Executive Assistant to
the PresidentPSA & PSA/DNAP: [redacted]F: [redacted]

As previously stated, the Quick Opinion service is exactly as it sounds: our authenticators’ candid reaction to an image. Most importantly, before a customer proceeds with their request, we clearly state that the opinion rendered through this service it NOT GUARANTEED and even mention that a change of opinion can occur upon submittal of the signed item(s). PSA rendered the service advertised and detailed on our website in full, and therefore, this case does not warrant a refund as a result. PSA considers this matter closed.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Regards,
[redacted]
Nothing is guaranteed  in life you are providing a service with your experts how good can he be he got 2 of my signatures wrong and I lost a lot of money on his opinion lost money from your company and when I bid on what he said what good is that service if he can not get1 out of 2 right I put 2 in and your quick opinion got both wrong .I have used the quick pick service  about 25times I would say he rendered likely genuine  3 times so the other 22 times he said likely not genuine they could of been genuine your taking people money and now I confront you are trying to cover up fake opinions is what your selling and taking peoples money I spent at least $250 on your quick opinion and I finally get a likely genuine and send it in to you you will not pass it not one but 2 of them Quick pick is so I can bid with confidence they took a second look at my signature they just do that to please  the customer they were never going to change the opinion quick opine is a fake service to take your money when they rendered a likely genuine and you send it in you do not pass it if they render it not likely  genuine they rendered it not genuine what good is this service but a money maker for PSA I want my refund for your services  I will not ask for my bidding money  I am trying to be fair and I will close this with service  refund thats the least you can do you held up my order for 3 weeks sending it to NY why you had the experts look at my pictures in your Calf office and they said to dersrves a second look and then you send it to NJ you say for fresh  eyes what is the matter with your experts eyes at your main office the is a routine PSA does when they take a second look and they know you will got get them to pass you just opened  the NJ office last year what did you do for all those years  that you did not have that office you did it at your main office you sent mine to NJ a onsite office  dont you have trust in your main office to take a second look Like I stated I am customer that gave you a lot of business and I am not satisfied   with your service  you should make your customer  happy not fight with them I just want my money for my service from you and I will close it you need to revise  your quick opinion service so your not taking people money for believing  in there opinion they are experts act like one.

PSA is a third-party authentication service for various types of collectibles. People submit items to our firm seeking our opinion of the items as it relates to their authenticity and, sometimes, quality. In our 25 years in the hobby, PSA has processed over 25 million cards and collectibles with a...

cumulative declared value of over a billion dollars. We are the preferred choice of collectors, dealers and auction houses worldwide. In this complaint, the customer contends that PSA lost his cards, found them, and then switched them before returning them. On all counts, there is no evidence to support these outlandish claims. Both in our NJ and CA offices, we have highly-trained employees handling customer submissions and processing collectibles.  In fact, many of the most valuable collectibles in the industry have been sent to us for evaluation because of the trust hobbyists have in our company.   PSA acknowledges that it did take longer than normal to have his submission shipped to our CA office for processing due to the workload in the NJ office taking precedence, but the cards were in a secure environment and accounted for in the interim. Moreover, even though our turnaround times are estimated and based on business days, PSA courteously expedited his submission once it arrived in CA to help make up for any former delays. In reference to his groundless accusation that PSA switched his cards, we can only state the facts: PSA is strictly a third-party authentication and grading company. Our firm is in no way involved in the commercial buying or selling of any collectibles, and therefore, we do not even possess the inventory to perform the actions for which we are being accused. The mere suggestion is ridiculous and impossible. At this time, our Customer Service team has already discussed the matter with the complainant and he has received a final response from our staff. At this point, the complainant is simply making unfounded allegations without any evidence or merit.

In the complainant’s original statement, he did not request answers to specific questions. Therefore, we simply responded to clarify that his settlement request had in fact been granted: his membership was cancelled.
Our Customer Service manager has already attempted to answer his questions about our process and what we could offer to compensate him (as a courtesy) for any inconvenience or added delays, but he was not satisfied. At this point, the complainant is simply using the Revdex.com as a venue to vent. If he would like us to explain the grading process in detail and discuss the orders in question again, PSA will gladly attempt to answer them as we’ve tried in the past. He is also welcome to call me directly if he wishes.
Otherwise, PSA has granted his settlement request and made it clear our lines of communication are always open if he would like to reach out.

PSA is a third-party
authentication service for various types of collectibles. People submit items
to our firm seeking our opinion of the items as it relates to...

authenticity and,
sometimes, quality. We have been in business for 24 years and have certified over
24 million collectibles.
 
In this complaint, the customer alleges
that PSA was unable to determine whether his autographs were genuine or not. This
is simply untrue. The autographs were examined and they failed the
authentication process. When this is the case, PSA cannot process a refund as
service was fully rendered. The service he requested was to determine if the
autographs were real or not and PSA provided its expert opinion.
 
The customer also claims that our
Customer Service told him two different stories regarding our process, but this
was not the case. If our experts cannot express an
opinion on an autograph, these will be given an “N9” designation in our system and
the customer will not be charged for the service. However, this is not what
occurred with his submission. Both the Customer Service rep he originally spoke
to and our Customer Service Manager clearly explained that his autographs failed
the authentication process completely (receiving an "N4" designation) – these autographs were simply not
authentic.
 
Ultimately, PSA satisfactorily
rendered the service requested and paid for. Although the customer may be upset
about the results (i.e., his autographs were inauthentic), this does not
warrant a refund of fees.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I am still not convinced that the service they advertise is legitimate.  I personally witnessed (1) of the signatures!!If evaluating the authenticity of a signature is difficult on a round object (baseball), then you should not accept them for review.  Their response is that they are just providing an opinion.  I think their service and expertise is less than what's advertised and is not justified in collecting a fee.The response I received for the 5 signatures was very general and generic.  Since I was charged for them to review each signature I should of received a detailed response explaining why each signature could not be verified.  I had to call Customer Service to try and determine what was wrong with each signature and the gentleman could not explain with specifics.  This is NOT acceptable service.I would appreciate a refund for the inadequate services provided.
Regards,
[redacted]

As already stated, there is no evidence to support these serious and unfounded allegations. Our employees are trained to handle the most valuable collectibles in the industry, and for 25 years hobbyists have entrusted their most prized possessions to us due to our long-standing record in the industry. At this time, our company has provided the complainant our final response. We processed and returned the same cards he submitted to our firm for grading. The customer received the service he requested satisfactorily and we consider the matter closed.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[They have come back to say the fact they switched cards and purposely damaged cards that were submitted to them as "Impossible". It appears the person responding tothis complaint is Supervisor [redacted] of PSA submissions, who did in fact recite the exact words listed in their response while on the telephone with me. Just to try and figure out how they/her can see my complaint as "Impossible" when there is a human factor. The claim of impossible would mean that all of PSA employees have 100% integrity. This is just not acceptable for me because I have proof that the cards were altered and/or switched out completely.They last time I spoke to [redacted] I wished at that time to file a complaint against [redacted] of their NJ office, to witch she responded "I can no longer help you and your case has been forwarded to our legal team" who I have not received any response from at this time.]
Regards,
[redacted]