Bizarre sports card insurace case

**jradford** · 11-30-2012, 02:19 PM

Nothing in this article adds up

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...=2012311290056

**Sherminator** · 11-30-2012, 03:55 PM

Very strange indeed. Sounds like the jury was the only sensible party in this whole things, awarding him nothing.

**Monsterx** · 11-30-2012, 05:16 PM

"But Prendergast’s response was this: Why, if evidence of the collection was so lacking, did Pacific provide insurance in the first place?"

This is what I was wondering myself...

**xposipx** · 11-30-2012, 10:07 PM

If nothing else, this proves the value of having a Photobucket account and especially an updated Beckett account once a year or so to keep inventory and insured values.

**brose61** · 11-30-2012, 10:20 PM

I think it proves that insurance in general is a fraud.
You can insure a fake collection but can't collect when that fake collection goes missing.

Originally Posted by xposipx

If nothing else, this proves the value of having a Photobucket account and especially an updated Beckett account once a year or so to keep inventory and insured values.

**sschind** · 12-01-2012, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Monsterx

"But Prendergast’s response was this: Why, if evidence of the collection was so lacking, did Pacific provide insurance in the first place?"

This is what I was wondering myself...

The insurance company explained that part. If you call them for insurance they will insure you but if you lose something you need to prove you had it. I think both sides are shysters in this case. I don't doubt that Pendergast had a bunch of cards (most likely worthless mass produced crap) that he claimed were worth millions (isn't everyone's collection worth millions before they actually find out it's worthless.) He I wouldn't be surprised if he actually found out how muchthey were worth and arranged the theft himself. It sounds like the insurance company deals with this type of insurance and i am sure they knew what they were doing. They got to keep this guys premium money knowing it would be very likely they wouldn't have to pay out.

Not much I hate worse than crooks and insurance companies though they are pretty much one in the same.

**xposipx** · 12-01-2012, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by brose61

I think it proves that insurance in general is a fraud.
You can insure a fake collection but can't collect when that fake collection goes missing.

It proves that also! BUT if you actually own the cards and legitimate home owners insurance then you need to have them inventoried somehow.

**chajones** · 12-01-2012, 11:57 AM

Right, I have 300K of insurance on the stuff IN my house, but my insurance company doesn't have a clue what that "stuff" is. They would assume it is furniture, appliances, clothes, jewelry, home entertainment, some minor collection etc etc, but they ask us for no proof of ownership until something happens and I file a claim. They will take my money every month and if something happens, God forbid, they will pay. Unless I make some ridiculous claim like - oh yea in addition to all of that, I had a $200,00o diamond in my wife's closet that I have no proof of - please pay me. The answer would be NO!

And it makes sense!

**GeorgehenryCollec** · 12-01-2012, 02:27 PM

While I agree with the decision. I think they should have at least refunded the guy the money he paid into the insurance.

**GiantsSB42Champs** · 12-01-2012, 02:49 PM

i dont think the guy she be refunded he tried to rip them off and he had to put some cash into do it... So because his attempt didn't work we should give him back the money for his risk of top make a quick $4 mil..

Look at that guys picture, and the circumstances no way that guy had $450 k to drop into cards... it's just false all around