The Topps Company Inc.

Substitution values are determined buy recently sold items on *** and *** values The value the consumer paid for a card is not relevant in the valuing of a card

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and while my answer hasn't really been answered I don't want to deal with this anymore and will just assume all the mat relics used thus far have not been from actual events
Sincerely,
*** ***

We apologize for the long wait times on support issuesSince his issues in November we have dramatically ramped up our support efforts/teamIf he can tell us the amount of coins he is missing and the name on his account, we can make sure he has any missing coins sent to him

RevDex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
There was never a discussion about coming to an agreement in value. I was told at first it was worth 300, then told it was a mistake and it was worth (this is a Ted Williams/Nomar Garciaparra Cut Auto Dual Auto Book from Five Star Product). After being told what the value was, I expressed what I would be willing to take as a replacement. *** said that it would be a couple days to get some "things" put together. (I have saved email correspondences backing up everything that was said)After another days of waiting, I received an abrupt response saying that they would just go ahead and make the card over and would no longer communicate with me. In the meantime, Topps released products, both having Ted Williams Cut Autos in them for a total of cards. Why would one of those Cut Auto's not be used immediately to make my new card that is from 2013? I asked several times to provide me with information on how the card was damaged (that was the last excuse I was given after several before), and have yet to been given that information.
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
So how do we know if any of the mat relics the UFC has sent to you are authentic fight used mights? I know I gave one example where someone owns the whole mat from a WEC event but I know of a completely different WEC event as well that Topps had mat relics for and a collector owns the whole matSo that is two instances and makes me wonder how many more there are...The mat relic cards that are still being released still say "Authentic Event-Used Fight Mat Relic" so how any we be sure which ones were event used and which ones arent?
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

Topps does not guarantee quantity of variations in a box/case the consumer is mentioning in claimOdds of the cards the consumer is looking for are based on the print quantity of the product as a whole

At this time, I have been contacted directly by The Topps Company Inc. regarding complaint ID ***, however my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
Topps has failed to address the issue I raised (that being the collation within its products). Below is a chronology of my recent
communications with Topps: On ** October I submitted an updated complaint to Topps. Sometime before ** October Topps closed my complaint without offering a response.On ** October I requested confirmation of the basis upon which my complaint had been solved.On ** October Topps wrote to me asking whether I had received the guaranteed card from the product. On ** October I replied confirming that I had not but reaffirmed my primary complaint was product collation.On * November Topps wrote to me setting out a process whereby I could request the missing guaranteed card from the product and again closed the complaint file. It is apparent that Topps has not read my complaint in detail.On * November I responded to Topps asking them to read my complaint again as it does not relate to the missing guaranteed card from the product.I have received no reply since * November.In short, Topps has failed to address my complaint and has consistently attempted to close my file without any proper response
Sincerely,
*** O***

Topps does not make any guarantee a consumer will not receive a duplicated card(s) There is nothing we can do for this complaint We have shared the consumer's feedback with our production department to review and consider for future products

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID#***, and have determined that my complaint
has NOT been resolved because:
Topps have conveniently omitted the fact that they damaged my property whilst it was in their possessionThey admitted to damaging the corner of the card and then trimming the card down to try to hide the damage they had causedI have photos of the card from before and afterThe card is now around 1/inch shorter from top to bottom (cards are a standard size) This has impacted the value of the cardRealising their mistake, they initially tried to get me to sign a waiver removing any responsibility on their part (I refused), so they returned the card with a message saying:This email is in reference to the Topps Triple Threads Letter Plus Autograph Relic Card of *** *** **1/(card # TTLPAR-CR).Topps offered to remake, replace or substitute the card and you have declinedPursuant to your request and discussions with Topps Customer Service, we are sending back the card to you, AS ISAs a result, Topps no longer will have any obligation to replace, remake, substitute or otherwise address this card in the future.Best regards,***Customer Service RepresentativeIt is true that they offered to remake the card but they could not guarantee that this would be possible within the next 6-months, or even that they could do it at all.It is true that they offered to substitute the card but offered a value of $350, despite the fact that I could prove that it cost me in excess of $600.Following this message, I have not responded to Topps, but I do not accept that they have fulfilled their obligations in this matterThey have negatively impacted the value of this item through their own negligence, having incorrectly manufactured the card in the first placeI would have hoped that a company like Topps would have accepted their mistake and at least made a goodwill gesture, nevermind making up for the fact that they damaged a $600+ item.Instead, they constantly evaded the issue during our discussions and their response to the Revdex.com shows the complete lack of resonsibility they feel about this matterI do not think you can damage someone's property, send it back to them with a note saying that they are only sending it back on the basis that you do not take the matter furtherIf I had taken my automobile in for a tuand it was dented and scratched whilst in the possession of the garage owner, they would liable to give compensationThey certainly could not say that they would only give me the car back if agreed not to take the matter furtherThis matter is no different to that example, I do not accept that Topps have resolved this issue to my satisfaction.
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

This was handled directly with ToppsConsumer received two graded Puig cards in place of his originalTracking # ***

I have been a customer of Topps for over 30 years. The redemption program at Topps is a farce and needs to be over hauled immediately. I have 14 "redemptions" for autographs that are guaranteed in their products. These have been awaiting fulfillment for over a year. I spoke to one of the customer service representatives today, and was told that I will get them when I get them. One product, Topps Dynasty, costs $300 for one package containing one card. Imagine spending this and only receiving a promise that one day, you may get what you paid for. Topps needs to take a long hard look at their redemption policies and the training they do for their customer service.

We have put new procedures in place to make sure this does not happen when we receive relics from the UFC.

Consumer disagrees with Topps policy on current market value. Topps is happy to substitute the card due to [redacted]s. To complete the substitution, [redacted] can email [redacted] or call ###-###-####. We will work with [redacted] to find a suitable equal current market value replacement.

As advised there are no other options.

Topps is happy to substitute the card due to [redacted]. To complete the substitution, [redacted] can email [redacted] or call ###-###-####. We will work with [redacted] to find a suitable equal current market value replacement.

Topps is happy to offer a 20% discount on the shipping fee for the 382 cards [redacted] has in his eTopps account. To process this request, [redacted] should contact our customer service department for full instructions, ###-###-####.

Consumers product was shipped to him in April 2015. Tracking # [redacted].

The card was returned to [redacted].Tracking # [redacted]It was delivered and signed for two days after it was shipped.Matter is resolved.

Revdex.com:At this time, I have not been contacted by The Topps Company Inc. regarding complaint ID [redacted].Sincerely,[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: First, thank you for your continued follow up of this issue on my behalf.Turning to the response from Topps, I am extremely disappointed because it is apparent that whoever is dealing with the issue has not read my emails.To quote my direct emails to Topps I have said:"I appreciate that there will be some duplication across cases and completely accept that as part of the process. My expectations for a single case are not however 25 unique autographs of a guaranteed 40. That level of collation is an issue for Topps to consider. By any measure, four autographs of the one player Dean Anna (10% of the case autographs) is unacceptable."My point has not been that there is some duplication, it concerns an unacceptable level of duplication.Again, to quote from my direct communication with Topps, I have highlighted the level of duplication with the following statistics from the product:"I have since revisited the video to record, in detail, the collation issue. It is, for the record, as follows:1 x quad duplication - Dean Anna2 x triple duplication - David Holmberg and Josmil Pinto8 x double duplication - Chris Owings, Roenis Elias, Taijuan Wlaker, Oscar Taveras, JR Murphy, Jonathan Schoop, Abraham Almonte and Eddie Butler.14 x single autos."In short, I accept some duplication will occur.  My complaint relates excessive duplication which sits outside acceptable product standards or the standard expected for the sale of any goods (irrespective of guaranteed standards).In Australia, sale of goods legislation concerns conditions and warranties imported into the contract for purchase of goods or services by a consumer. These implied conditions used terms, such as “merchantable quality” and “fitness for purpose”, drawn from 19th-century English mercantile law.  In my view, the duplication I experienced falls outside what is reasonably expected from a consumer and certainly beyond what Topps might have as their "standard".I understand Australian law doesn't apply but I would be surprised to find that the US did not have similar provisions relating to the sale of goods.I note that Topps have said there is nothing they can do.  That is wrong.  Topps have confirmed to me that they will, in fact, replace some duplicate cards.  Please see below the response from "Michael":"Staff Account Michael via Email 12/**/2014 04:23 PM Hello [redacted],
[redacted] [redacted]
[redacted] [redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]So, I am confused.  They will replace some (according to Michael) but they can't according to whoever is responding to the Revdex.com.I can provide copies of all of this correspondence as may be necessary.  I have been nothing but reasonable in my queries.I don't want thousands of dollars in "compensation".  At this point, I would be happy to receive, say, 6 boxes of the product to "replace" the duplicate autos.  That certainly would save the Revdex.com, Topps and me money is replying to these emails.Thank you for your help. Regards,[redacted]  In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above. Sincerely, [redacted]
 
 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]