Hypothetical...

[taffster74]

You conduct a trade with someone after providing pictures of said card and they agreed to it. You send card, knowing it is good condition. A day after the person receives said card they complain the card is damaged with clearly visible scratches but do not provide images proving this. You immediately ask for proof. Another day goes by and the images finally come. The person accuses you of being dodgy and a scammer. Mind you their feedback is positive with a complaint about the allegedly damaged card. You constantly say the card was in pack condition when it left your hands and card was sent in slip, top end loader and cd/card mailer. In your opinion, who is the dodgy one here - the seller or the buyer? This may or may not be based on a real situation.

 

[Iron Clad Lou]

Now, I guess it depends on what is determined to be a scratch. A scratch to someone might be a flawless card to someone else.

It's very subjective, but I would lean on the side of the sender party.

No images of the alleged damage is a red flag. If I got a card and it was scratched to shit, I would be getting the DSLR out and highlighting it!