Attorney Advertising · A Class Action Has Been Filed · No Class Certified Yet
Attention Trading Card Collectors

Did You Have
Trading Cards
Graded by PSA?

A class action has been filed against PSA — and its parent, Collectors Holdings — alleging fraudulent grading practices that mislead consumers, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Trading card owners who may be affected are encouraged to come forward.

Alleged Misconduct
PSA
Inflated & Fraudulent
Grading Fees
ALLEGED01
PSA
Unwarranted
Upcharges
ALLEGED02
PSA
Inconsistent & Subjective Grading
ALLEGED03
PSA
Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest
ALLEGED04
PSA
RICO
Violations
ALLEGED05
Potential Defendants ▶
Collectors Holdings PSA
An Overview of the Case

A Class Action Over
PSA's Grading Practices

If you owned trading cards that were submitted to PSA for authentication and grading at any time during the past four years — through a card shop, dealer, or group submitter — and you paid grading fees, expedited fees, upcharges, or resubmission fees, you may be eligible to participate in this class action.

The allegations center on PSA — Collectors Universe, Inc., doing business as Professional Sports Authenticator — which is alleged to account for roughly 70% of graded-card volume, together with its parent, Collectors Holdings, Inc. PSA is alleged to market its grading as objective, standardized, and expert-driven while delivering subjective, inconsistent results, and to extract inflated and undisclosed fees. These are allegations only; no court has determined that any wrongdoing occurred.

The class action, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, seeks relief under civil RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1962), the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, and common-law claims including fraud and unjust enrichment, along with declaratory and injunctive relief and other remedies permitted by law. No class has been certified, and there is no assurance any class will be certified or that any recovery will result.

Case Q&A
Case Filing
Join Us
Contact
Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

The Allegations Against
Collectors Holdings

Core Allegations

What Defendants
Are Accused of

Fraudulent Grading Scheme

It is alleged that Defendants market card grading as an objective, expert-driven, standardized process while allegedly delivering subjective assessments with inconsistent results and limited quality controls. The complaint alleges the same card submitted multiple times can receive materially different grades.

Inflated Fees & Unwarranted Upcharges

The complaint alleges that after consumers surrender their cards, PSA demands adjusted grading fees based on its own valuation of the card — a valuation consumers allegedly cannot independently verify. It is further alleged that cards are not returned until all amounts are paid.

Market Dominance & Reinvested Proceeds

Through acquisitions of rival grading companies, Collectors is alleged to have consolidated the grading market — with PSA alone accounting for roughly 70% of graded-card volume — and to have reinvested proceeds of the alleged racketeering scheme into those acquisitions, in violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a), using that dominance to scale and entrench the alleged grading fraud.

RICO Violations (Pattern of Racketeering)

Defendants are alleged to constitute an association-in-fact enterprise that has engaged in a pattern of mail fraud and wire fraud — using interstate communications to induce consumer submissions based on material misrepresentations — in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, and 1962.

Conflicts of Interest & Vertical Integration

The complaint alleges that Collectors simultaneously grades cards, sets pricing through Card Ladder, vaults cards through PSA Vault, finances collectors through Collectors Financial Services, and brokers sales through eBay — allegedly creating undisclosed conflicts of interest at multiple stages of the transaction.

Claims for
Relief

01
RICO — 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) & (a)
Racketeering through a pattern of mail and wire fraud to extract fees, and reinvestment of proceeds into acquisitions.
02
Maryland Consumer Protection Act
Unfair, abusive, and deceptive trade practices in PSA's grading and pricing (Md. Code Ann., Com. Law §§ 13-101 et seq.).
03
Negligent Misrepresentation
Careless misrepresentations about grading expertise, objectivity, and reliability on which consumers reasonably relied.
04
Common Law Fraud
Material misrepresentations and omissions about grading objectivity and reliability.
05
Unjust Enrichment
Retention of inflated fees obtained through deceptive practices.
06
Declaratory Relief
Arbitration clauses, class waivers, and liability limits unenforceable against downstream consumers.
Filed · U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

The
Complaint

Download the Complaint
Read the full class action complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (PDF).
Case Information
Court U.S. District Court, District of Maryland
Case Number [CASE NUMBER — add at filing]
Date Filed [FILING DATE — add]
Status Filed — no class certified
Case Type Class Action
Potential Defendants Collectors Universe, Inc. d/b/a PSA; Collectors Holdings, Inc.
Claims Civil RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) & (a)); Maryland Consumer Protection Act; fraud; negligent misrepresentation; unjust enrichment; declaratory & injunctive relief
Jury Trial Demanded
Relief Sought Treble damages and injunctive relief as permitted by law
Confidential · No Obligation · Attorney-Client Privilege May Apply

Tell Us About Your
Experience.

If you or your minor children submitted trading cards to PSA, SGC, or Beckett through a card shop, dealer, or group submitter at any time in the past four years and paid any grading-related fees, you may be eligible to join this class action. Your responses help us understand your experience and evaluate your potential claim. All information is confidential and there is no obligation to participate.

As a Trading Card Collector, I Have…
Section 1: Your Information
Section 2: Your Card Submissions
Section 3: Fees You Paid
Section 4: Post-Submission Upcharges
Section 5: Expedited Service
Section 6: Grading Consistency & Accuracy
Section 7: PSA Vault, Card Ladder & Sales
Section 8: Your Story

By submitting this form, you are not retaining an attorney or becoming a client. Submission is confidential and does not obligate you to participate in the lawsuit. An attorney may contact you to discuss your potential claim. This website constitutes attorney advertising.

✓ Thank you — your experience has been submitted. An attorney from the Zealous Advocates team will review your information and be in touch soon.
Zealous Advocates

The Case
Team

Attorneys

Counsel for
Plaintiffs

Thomas R. Bundy III
Thomas R. Bundy III
Zealous Advocates
Admitted in Maryland · U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Thomas.Bundy@Z-Advocates.com
Adam Crandell
Adam Crandell
Zealous Advocates
Admitted in Maryland · U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Adam.Crandell@Z-Advocates.com
Jeremy Eldridge
Jeremy Eldridge
Zealous Advocates
Admitted in Maryland · U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Eldridge@Z-Advocates.com
Andrew D. Herman
Andrew D. Herman
Zealous Advocates
Admitted in California and the District of Columbia; pro hac vice admission in the District of Maryland anticipated
Andrew.Herman@Z-Advocates.com
Stanley Brand
Stanley Brand
Zealous Advocates
Admitted in the District of Columbia; pro hac vice admission in the District of Maryland anticipated
Brand@Z-Advocates.com

Zealous Advocates

Thomas.Bundy@Z-Advocates.com

Zealous Advocates

Adam.Crandell@Z-Advocates.com

Zealous Advocates

Andrew.Herman@Z-Advocates.com