Does anyone have experience with Upper Deck replacing your cards? Need some help.

[Savard18]

The reason they state that they cannot replace cards from the secondary market is essentially them giving themselves protection. This hobby, unfortunately, attracts some lowlife people. People who fake patches. People who alter cards. People who sell damaged cards, etc.

If I buy a card from a guy on eBay and it shows up damaged, who is accountable? The eBay seller. I can't go to Upper Deck in that situation and request replacement because it wasn't factory damaged, and even if it was there's now a layer of removal that says that it could have been damaged by the previous owner.

This industry has a long legacy of patch fakers, and unfortunately that plays a role in that card's current situation. Yes we *know* it is probably incorrect from the original source (UD) but it's exchanged hands at least once before making its way to you. At that point, it's no longer a situation where UD has liability. May not like it, but it is what it is.

I have, in the past, had memorabilia cards replaced and corrected. Similar thing where the pieces were obviously switched up. I was the original owner, and they were great with the process. Even threw in an extra card.

If I was a petty person I could sue Upper Deck, force them to take the card back and win... Upper Deck is basically saying they know they produced an error card, they don't care and are literally placing the liability on me and I don't like that AT ALL...

Imagine if this was a vehicle.. How fast do you think a car dealer or manufacturer would take a car back which has an obvious manufacturing defect regardless of where it was purchased?.. What would happen in that case is my car would be fixed or it would be replaced - I wouldn't be told to go pound sand with the implication that I was responsible for the manufacturing defect..

The same consumer laws apply across the board to all products.

As I said the card is not damaged - it's an error card - Upper Deck admitted it was an error card..

And it's funny... Up until a few days ago I had a positive opinion of Upper Deck and their products, now not so much...

I mean UD agreed to take it back, then they emailed me back with my ebay auction telling me they wont take it back...

And I don't buy the whole "shady collectors manufacturing patches" explanation.... There is absolutely zero way to counterfeit these UD patch cards....

I mean the notion that I took a perfectly good card and reversed the patches to return the card is ridiculous..

[Skip]

Interesting discussion, and I'll add my .02 worth.
I had some experience with UD many years ago and, IIRC, they were fine to deal with.
That being said, I understand their position to an extent. The card was purchased by a buyer who knew, or should have known it was an error. The eBay listing (from what I can tell from the posts) contained a scan showing the card. The eBay purchser had the opportunity, in fact the duty, to examine that scan. It was obvious and apparent from the scan what was being purchased. It was purchased nonetheless. Now the eBay purchser wants UD to make good for his mistake?
I also have my doubts that you would prevail in a lawsuit against UD. Your car analogy is poor one. I think a better would be if a Chevrolet is listed for sale by its current owner on eBay.The car is yellow in color as shown in the pictures of the listing, but described verbally as a red car in the lisiting description. The buyer bids on it and wins, and when the yellow car shows up, can he complain that he thought he was buying a red car and that Chevrolet should replace it with a red car? I think not.
That is different than if the buyer walks into the Chevrolet dealer's showroom, orders a red car and receives a yellow car.
Just my thoughts

[canucksfan007]

There is absolutely zero way to counterfeit these UD patch cards....

What world do you live on? Have you not been in the game for a long time?

You speak like you think everything you say is fact ........ better get the facts straight =S

[RGM81]

If I was a petty person I could sue Upper Deck, force them to take the card back and win... Upper Deck is basically saying they know they produced an error card, they don't care and are literally placing the liability on me and I don't like that AT ALL...

Imagine if this was a vehicle.. How fast do you think a car dealer or manufacturer would take a car back which has an obvious manufacturing defect regardless of where it was purchased?.. What would happen in that case is my car would be fixed or it would be replaced - I wouldn't be told to go pound sand with the implication that I was responsible for the manufacturing defect..

The same consumer laws apply across the board to all products.

As I said the card is not damaged - it's an error card - Upper Deck admitted it was an error card..

And it's funny... Up until a few days ago I had a positive opinion of Upper Deck and their products, now not so much...

I mean UD agreed to take it back, then they emailed me back with my ebay auction telling me they wont take it back...

And I don't buy the whole "shady collectors manufacturing patches" explanation.... There is absolutely zero way to counterfeit these UD patch cards....

I mean the notion that I took a perfectly good card and reversed the patches to return the card is ridiculous..

If that were true, there wouldn't be a thriving patch faking industry. Now, *you* might be a person of impeccable integrity and would never alter the card. But there's a lot of people out there who would. UD has no recourse to know every individual involved in the hobby, track every eBay sale and seller, etc. As soon as there's an element of removal from the original owner, it's no longer a situation where they have liability. You don't have to like it, but you need to accept that this is the situation.

[Savard18]

Interesting discussion, and I'll add my .02 worth.
I had some experience with UD many years ago and, IIRC, they were fine to deal with.
That being said, I understand their position to an extent. The card was purchased by a buyer who knew, or should have known it was an error. The eBay listing (from what I can tell from the posts) contained a scan showing the card. The eBay purchser had the opportunity, in fact the duty, to examine that scan. It was obvious and apparent from the scan what was being purchased. It was purchased nonetheless. Now the eBay purchser wants UD to make good for his mistake?
I also have my doubts that you would prevail in a lawsuit against UD. Your car analogy is poor one. I think a better would be if a Chevrolet is listed for sale by its current owner on eBay.The car is yellow in color as shown in the pictures of the listing, but described verbally as a red car in the lisiting description. The buyer bids on it and wins, and when the yellow car shows up, can he complain that he thought he was buying a red car and that Chevrolet should replace it with a red car? I think not.
That is different than if the buyer walks into the Chevrolet dealer's showroom, orders a red car and receives a yellow car.
Just my thoughts

First off I'm not going to sue UD, secondly there would absolutely be a lawsuit here.

Also, I didn't notice the patch error until I received the card.. I found this auction with perhaps 10 minutes left... I knew I wanted the card, I had a limited amount of time to figure what I was comfortable paying for it so I didn't "comb" the card... I mean it never would have occurred to me that UD would release an error card in a $150.00 product - but they did and now they're being pricks about it.

So don't try to claim this is my fault because Upper Deck is too cheap to hire competent quality control..

And my analogy is 100% relevant.

I'm not arguing condition here - this card has a manufacturing defect and Upper Deck acknowledged this..

In reality if this was a car then the car manufacturer would have issued a recall - that's what have happened in that situation. Cars are issued with manufacturing defects all the time and guess what? the defects are fixed for free..

So don't pin UD's incompetence on me.

[Savard18]

If that were true, there wouldn't be a thriving patch faking industry. Now, *you* might be a person of impeccable integrity and would never alter the card. But there's a lot of people out there who would. UD has no recourse to know every individual involved in the hobby, track every eBay sale and seller, etc. As soon as there's an element of removal from the original owner, it's no longer a situation where they have liability. You don't have to like it, but you need to accept that this is the situation.

I don't see how faking a patch is even possible or altering a card is possible without noticing... That makes no sense at all...

I would really love to see an example of one of these fake patches, because I cant see how or better yet why someone would take apart one of these cards and replace or put material in it.... It seems like quite a difficult task and risk to make a few bucks..... I mean that would constitute several federal fraud charges, and someone could go to prison for that... Never mind the logistics required to "fake" a card.

Now, I have seen people make their own cards and sell them - but they don't claim they're anything BUT "art projects" or "home made cards" (and a lot of these cards are pretty cool I might add)...

Also, hopefully Upper Deck is aware of their products enough to weed out the alleged fakes. I mean if they're worried about replacing fake cards with real cards then Upper Deck has more issues then I thought..

[Savard18]

What world do you live on? Have you not been in the game for a long time?

You speak like you think everything you say is fact ........ better get the facts straight =S

Then please show me a "fake" Upper Deck jersey/patch....Better yet show me a fake jersey/patch that is an error - that has the patches in the wrong place... One would assume if you're going to fake a card you would pay enough attention to get the details right, lol.

Now, of course - if Upper Deck can produce these cards then so could anyone with access to the same machinery... I'm assuming it would require a very nice and expensive 3D printer and a bunch of other pricey equipment, however I don't see how someone could just go around selling fake cards that are worth enough to make it with the time without getting caught... I mean a lot of these cards that are worth what would justify such an operation are limited. They're xx/5, xx/2, xx/10 cards, very sought after cards - not only that but I'm sure anyone with the cash to blow on a card like that would want the card to be slabbed... Just my .02 cents on these fake patches/jerseys.

[Skip]

There is really little point in continuing this discussion as you will not listen to reason and logic.
An item was listed for sale.
The listing contained a picture of the item.
A bidder saw the listing and bid on the item.
The bidder won the item that was pictured.
The item that was pictured was delivered to the winning bidder.
The bidder then realized that the item that was pictured, on which he bid, and which he received, was not an item he thought it was.

No one is trying to place any fault on you other than your own: in failing to make a proper inspection, failing to see what was there to be seen, making a hasty decision.

None of that is Upper Deck's fault.

Of interest here is that there has been no mention of any attempt to resolve this through eBay, the Seller, or PayPal (if that was the method of pament.) I would be interested in knowing what steps were taken with respect to them.

As far as a lawsuit against UD, I'd love to defend that. First, you have no privity with UD, so no standing to bring a claim against them.
Second, I'd love to cross-examine you about it; I am sure that when done, no Judge or Jury would hold UD liable. In fact, I doubt that any such lawsuit would ever get to trial, as it would probably be dismissed on motion.

You received what you bid on. The fact that YOU failed to properly and adequately look at what you bid on is no one's fault but your own.

First off I'm not going to sue UD, secondly there would absolutely be a lawsuit here.

Also, I didn't notice the patch error until I received the card.. I found this auction with perhaps 10 minutes left... I knew I wanted the card, I had a limited amount of time to figure what I was comfortable paying for it so I didn't "comb" the card... I mean it never would have occurred to me that UD would release an error card in a $150.00 product - but they did and now they're being pricks about it.

So don't try to claim this is my fault because Upper Deck is too cheap to hire competent quality control..

And my analogy is 100% relevant.

I'm not arguing condition here - this card has a manufacturing defect and Upper Deck acknowledged this..

In reality if this was a car then the car manufacturer would have issued a recall - that's what have happened in that situation. Cars are issued with manufacturing defects all the time and guess what? the defects are fixed for free..

So don't pin UD's incompetence on me.

[canucksfan007]

Then please show me a "fake" Upper Deck jersey/patch....Better yet show me a fake jersey/patch that is an error - that has the patches in the wrong place... One would assume if you're going to fake a card you would pay enough attention to get the details right, lol.

Now, of course - if Upper Deck can produce these cards then so could anyone with access to the same machinery... I'm assuming it would require a very nice and expensive 3D printer and a bunch of other pricey equipment, however I don't see how someone could just go around selling fake cards that are worth enough to make it with the time without getting caught... I mean a lot of these cards that are worth what would justify such an operation are limited. They're xx/5, xx/2, xx/10 cards, very sought after cards - not only that but I'm sure anyone with the cash to blow on a card like that would want the card to be slabbed... Just my .02 cents on these fake patches/jerseys.

Your .02 cents are wrong. I am sorry, but there is no other way to say it.

"Show me a fake UD patch"
- During the 1st 5-6 years of the Cup, many of the higher end players /99 along with their golds were cataloged. They cataloged the same card twice, with different patches. Some of the very high end collectors would keep this database for all people to see. PWCC has listed and sold KNOWN faked patch cards, most noticeably a Laine Premier RC Au Patch UD used on their sell sheets. I dont know where the archive has gone, maybe @RGM81 can point you in the right direction.

"if Upper Deck can produce these cards then so could anyone with access to the same machinery"
- Patch forgers do not re-produce these cards. They simply pop out the undesired patch and put in a better copy. I dont think its as hard as you think to take out a patch and replace it when a new one

"I mean a lot of these cards that are worth what would justify such an operation are limited"
- Wrong. The most profitable cards to fake a patch are rookie cards, not limited ones at all. Cup RCs /249 and /99, SPA FW Au Patch /100, Premier RC Au Patches /199 and /299. A crazy patch from a rookie year card will always beat out non rookie year cards.

"not only that but I'm sure anyone with the cash to blow on a card like that would want the card to be slabbed"
- Sorry, wrong again. The majority of the people that slab cards do it for rookie cards, and not usually thick ones like patches. Upper Deck Young Guns, Ice Rookies /99, Ultimate Auto Rookies .... these are the types of cards most popular to grade. Some of the LEAST popular cards to grade in our hobby is patch cards, because they are notorious for getting poor grades seeing as they essentially have 8 edges and 8 corners. Also, cards like The Cup / Premier are packaged in a way which allows them to get damaged. Grading a random non rookie year patch card does very little to increase the value even if it grades a 9.5. Grading a x/5 or x/2 card also does very little to the increase the value.

[Savard18]

There is really little point in continuing this discussion as you will not listen to reason and logic.
An item was listed for sale.
The listing contained a picture of the item.
A bidder saw the listing and bid on the item.
The bidder won the item that was pictured.
The item that was pictured was delivered to the winning bidder.
The bidder then realized that the item that was pictured, on which he bid, and which he received, was not an item he thought it was.

No one is trying to place any fault on you other than your own: in failing to make a proper inspection, failing to see what was there to be seen, making a hasty decision.

None of that is Upper Deck's fault.

Of interest here is that there has been no mention of any attempt to resolve this through eBay, the Seller, or PayPal (if that was the method of pament.) I would be interested in knowing what steps were taken with respect to them.

As far as a lawsuit against UD, I'd love to defend that. First, you have no privity with UD, so no standing to bring a claim against them.
Second, I'd love to cross-examine you about it; I am sure that when done, no Judge or Jury would hold UD liable. In fact, I doubt that any such lawsuit would ever get to trial, as it would probably be dismissed on motion.

You received what you bid on. The fact that YOU failed to properly and adequately look at what you bid on is no one's fault but your own.

And people buy defective products on the secondary market all the time and legally in many circumstances these companies are required to replace those products with corrected products. This is why there are recalls. The fact this is a sports card is absolutely IRRELEVANT, and that's where you're wrong.... You would be right if this card was DAMAGED but it's NOT..

You could argue I knowingly purchased an error all you like but none of that matters or changes the fact the card is an error, or that I knowingly purchased an error card -- because I didn't.

Funny how Upper Deck issued the card in the first place and this card slipped thru many cracks to make it into packs. This card sure in the hell fooled Upper Deck into releasing it.. The only reason why this patch is noticeable is because McDavid's patch has a tiny strip of Orange otherwise BOTH patches are Blue and White..

Yet I should have known better? lol.. Perhaps Upper Deck should have better quality control or competent staff designing and producing cards?

The card fooled Upper Deck to make it though the design, production and distribution/QC process and that's fine but I'm the dummy for not noticing the patch?

It's interesting seeing collectors side with a monopoly that issued a blatant error and refuse to replace it.

And I don't want the card replaced, because there is little chance UD would have made it worth my time, but I'm blown away that anyone would defend UD given the fact they're the ones that clearly screwed up here and (if I chose) are refusing to fix THEIR mistake.