Fustrated with ANACS

[creilly]

I sent 5 coins to be graded and atributed.
The first was one of those 1955 S pennies with the big lamination peel on it. Came back as a MS65 Red, but they took the peel off that was still attached. I didnt think they would do that. I actually wrote it on the submission form. That I wanted it preserved with the peel attached as I thought it was worth more with it still there and they told me they could do that. UGGGHHHHHHHH
Then I sent in 3 morgans top 100's 2 came back stating Cleaned but I KNOW they have not been cleaned. I took them out of the saftey deposit box myself. The 3rd came back MS 63 which is where I felt all should grade.
Also I sent in a franklin came back PF 64 but I can read a pack of smokes from 2 feet in the darn thing.... and now it has a finger print on it and No cameo or deep cameo grade.
Should I complain or will it just get me no where? On the Franklin... I tried to take a picture showing the mirror fisnish but I didnt have enough hands. Howeveer if you lok at the last 1 in the date that is a reflection of the 1, so as you can see its is very nice opr it was pre finger print
But hey my pictures are getting better!!

[coop]

Catherine: The 1961 proof Cent isn't a cameo. The frosted look must appear on both side in order for them to be called cameos. But yours looks like a regular proof. Sorry. Fingerprint don't look good. The 1955-S Looks unusal. Good grade though for an error coin. At least you got your coins slabbed. PCGS just takes your money and bodybag coins that are cleaned or suspicious looking. Doesn't seem fair they should go that, but they don't get my money. ANACAs is better to deal with. You should have the fingerprint dusted and findout who handled it incorrectly.

[creilly]

I should have it finger printed, I have pictures of just before I mailed it with the packing and what not for insurance and there was no finger print on that franklin!!!

[eagames]

The first things I sent upset me but I realize they were mostly correct. Occasionaly they missed the variety I listed but after returning they did fix. Coops right, ANACs is good although they are the toughest graders on modern copper! From what I see ANACs is equal on grades to PCGS but ANACS is even tougher on saying RED, often dark ones get RED from PCGS but ANACs will call them RB. I rarely see grade changes between them and when it does it's random to go up/down between the 2 companies. PCGS won't attribute most things and won't even slab anything they say is cleaned, scratched, corroded, recolored. NGC in similar to PCGS but a little easier in standards.

On the 61 half it's a shiny proof but the portrait isn't frosted enough for Cameo. The 64 grade isn't based on shine, it's possibly some tiny marks or hairlines. Color/shine only matter if it changes it from RED to RB or BN it shouldn't change the grades.

I can only guess at the peel, if it was lifted at all they might not want it falling off in the holder or sticking up they might not be able to holder with it but in a way I would have expected them to leave it. Kinda strange.

I've also had stuff come back showing a print but can't rule out being me, maybe around the time I found or sent it. Prints don't show when made but in shipping it gets heated and then over the month it shows, it's unlikely the graders touched it. They're careful, clean areas and gloves. I bag them in a poly sports card bag, fold it then put in a clear flip so they don't risk damage getting it out. I had sent a modern variety and got back 68 RED but a print on it! It's possible when I opened the roll I touched it and over the month or after they holdered it then it showed but hmmm it still got 68 red.

The grading is another learning thing. and

[eagames]

Was it the 89 and 86 that came back cleaned?

Did they note any varieties?

Did they think the peel was notable?

[creilly]

Eagames thanks for the info.. calmed me down.. just disappointed I guess.
Oh I forgot all that.....
the grades
since this is copper coins .. penny first.. Labels read as follows
1955-S RD 65 Lamination

1961 Franklin PF 64 (Vam not noted states no variety.. I thought 802 but hey...)

The Morgans:
1889-O AU50 Oval O top 100 states cleaned and rim damage.

1882 AU53 Vam-1 cleaned

1886 MS63 Vam 1

I know those morgans are not cleaned. Period. I know who had them I know what he did with them and I know they were never cleaned. I think thats what gets my crawl the most here are the RV of those cleaned morgans.... HUMPH!! Rim damage right above the S in states

[coop]

The feathers on the breast must be complete to be uncirculated. One of the areas that wear first. (But that is all I know about Morgan's)
On cleaning. One way to tell is very light hair lines on the surface. Usually show more on details and fields. If you check under a scope you can usually see them. It doesn't matter who had the coins. Most were cleaned before they got them. Some experiment on their own. always with one motive. To make the coin look BU. The down side is that after each cleaning another layer of the surface is removed along with fine details. It happens. Different methods have been used over the years. Acid bath, creams to rub out imperfections (Makes the hair line scratches) Baking soda. Again more wearing off the surface. And the worst............ A brillo pad. Then there is whizzing. Mechanically buffing off the imperfections/details and leaving an unatural shine. All to look BU again, but never will as they remove the surface and details to look better. They always look like a $200 suit on a $2.00 body. (Sorry I had to go there)

[eagames]

On the bright side they did list the 55-s lamination and 65 is nice.
The 1886 MS63 VAM-1 is nice.
That's not the one you boiled was it?

The other 2 cleaned must be something they see. Sometimes if they ever get touched with a cloth that has any particles it makes some tiny lines and they say cleaned. Rims on big coins get bashed if anyone ever dropped it.

For me I always get surprised by something I thought was nice then read the label in shock! Then something I worried about comes back ok. I'm getting real careful about what to send.

[creilly]

LOL Coop.. I use to say I had a $1.00 body and a $1000. Personality!!
Now its more like a 1 cent body and million dollar personality...
Im shaped like a penny... round!!


I did not boil the 86 I boiled a very very worn G4 if anything 1921 morgan.
I swear I have not boiled another coin since not even a penny!!
I am not even going to worry about the morgans.. they are not mine.. just mine to sell and get 20%, I just sent along my penny since I had a coupon for a free one.

[Dick]

Cathy, I read your report, and recalled my deal with ANACS. It was very RAW! I'll never walk that path again. As far as the Morgan yopu cooked, be proud that you stopped there. I didn't. I cooked over a dozen ROLLS of wheats, (last few years of the term). I don;t know what I did but they look worse than before, except, they are not so full of crud! No harm done, I'll use them to fill albums for fillers. I don't think I'll make a very good cook, you might say I scorched the water!
Don't worry about the "shape like penny", it comes with the territory! Wife, kids etc, you know, like stopping at a number to forget Just how many have gine by. WAit until you become a GRANDMA! Life will become quite rosy, then. Keep up the good work, and Humor, you are an asset to the forum.
Dick

[smed]

[Russellhome]

I'm a little late on this post, but I also had a big problem with ANACS and fingerprints on the first submission I sent them after their move to Texas. I sent approx. 30 coins in -- mostly satin finish nickels and a few proof quarters. Fully 27 of the 30 coins came back with fingerprints on them and I KNOW they were not from me. I checked some other coins I'd bought in new ANACS holders and found fingerprint remnands on many of them.

I was pretty ticked off about it and contacted ANACS. They explained how everybody is required to wear latex gloves at all times when working on the floor. I know those coins must pass through several hands during the process, and they assured me that the latex gloves are worn at all times. And they basically denied that it was their doing. I then got a little friendly advice on how I should handle removing coins from mint sets for submission.

Assuming they were telling me the truth, I decided to do a little test. I went out and bought some latex gloves, put them on, then rubbed my forehead, scratched my nose -- and then IMPROPERLY handled an untouched proof quarter and a perfect satin finish nickel. And the results... The ANACS claim that wearing latex gloves prevents the possibility of fingerprints is absolutely wrong. The oils, sweat, and grime from just one itchy nose or forehead is enough to leave a clear and distinct fingerprint - ribs and all. The gloves only prevent oils and grime from your fingers getting on coins -- but the gloves are thin and tight enough to emulate a fingerprint from impurities on the outside surface of the glove.

I sent ANACS my test coins that I fingerprinted while wearing the gloves, along with the 27 fingerprinted coin slabs from my 30 coin submission. I quickly got a call from then president James Taylor and though they never actually admitted fault, they responded as if I’d proved my point and they promptly took care of the problem (i.e. removed the coins, erased the fingerprints somehow, and sent the coins back regraded and reholdered). I also got a few free submissions out of it. So in the end, I was pleased with how ANACS resolved the issue. I have sent in several submissions since then, and though not completely problem free, there have been no more fingerprints.

I did some searching around other forums to see of others were having the same problem. I didn’t see any particular issue with ANACS, but learned that fingerprints happen from time to time with any grading company. I saw several complaints about fingerprinted PCGS and NGC slabbed coins. But the problem I had with ANACS did not seem to be a freak occurrence - it looked to me like a quality control issue - possibly due to the newly hired workforce after the move. For coins I submit for grading, I handle them only by the rim and closely examine them before they go into the flip. If any coin I send in to a grading company comes back with a fingerprint, I will consider it their responsibility to correct the issue. ANACS did a great job of customer service (eventually), and they still have my business.

Here are 3 of the fingerprinted coins from that submission...





This last one had a fingerprint and some other grime added to the field.

I also complained about that clear, goopy looking stuff that has shown up around the rim on most of the coins I've sent in since the conversion to their new holders (see the 3rd photo, above GOD WE TRUST). On some of the ANACS slabbed coins I have, that stuff covered the entire top half of all the rim lettering and did not look good at all. On more recent submissions, that issue appears to be fixed as well. So, again - I am pleased that ANACS appears to listen to their customer complaints and does do something about legitimate issues.

And about sending in Lincoln cents -- I agree that ANACS is tight on grades. Everything seems to come back a full grade less than I expect. They seem to grade all proof coins very tight as well (A PF70 from ANACS is pretty hard to come by).

And I'd bet that the piece of lamination that was lost off of the 1955 cent shown in the original post occured at the time of encapsulation. After the pros see your coins, they are in the hands of blue-collar workers to get slabbed and sent back to you. I have nothing against blue-collar workers, but I imagine that most of them are not error coin enthusiasts and one of them probably thought they did you a favor by removing that loose little fleck of copper.

[eagames]

Hmm the one that I mentioned above was also right at the time they moved.

I wonder exactly what they used to remove the prints

[Russellhome]

My first submissions to ANACS were just a few months before the move, but just after the switch to the new holder. They were also mostly Satin Finish nickels from Westward Journey nickel sets. I still have a bunch of those "pre-move" slabs, and none of them have fingerprints. I always use the same technique to remove the coins from the set ind put them in flips - which does not involve touching the coin. So, I figured the "after the move" submission that came back full of prints had to have happened at ANACS. At the time all this was going on, I went fingerprint hunting on eBay -- and many of the coins in the light blue version of the new slab (which started in Austin) showed fingerprints in the listing photo. So it was a real problem for a while.

I don't know what they did to remove the prints. Perhaps I should have asked. On a satin finish nickel, I don't think removing a fresh print is much of a problem. I think dabbing it with a cotton ball soaked in pure alcohol would do a fine job with no sign of cleaning. One of the coins I sent back was a PF69 Dcam Washington quarter with a fingerprint in the field. They managed to remove that too - with no signs of the print or cleaning that I could see. Any time I've tried to do anything to a proof, it looks worse than the problem I was trying to remove. So, now I really wish I knew what they did.

[Dick]

Maybe they used 409. I understand that is a good de-greaser. It is a good bet, they didn't use carburator cleaner!
Dick