Compensation Policy

This Policy explains how a loss or physical-damage claim is investigated, how the responsible custody stage affects the outcome, and how any compensation is calculated. The allocation of responsibility is also stated under Loss, Damage & Claims in the Submission Terms & Conditions.

Concept Grading remains your point of contact throughout the claim. We coordinate the investigation and any claim against a Grading Company, shipping or courier provider or insurer. That customer-facing role does not by itself mean that Concept Grading caused the loss or damage.

Claims are assessed separately for each affected Submitted Item. Unaffected Submitted Items continue through the submission process as normal.

We first investigate the available evidence to determine when the loss or physical damage occurred and who had custody of the Submitted Item at that stage. Compensation is not determined merely by who communicated with you or arranged the Submission.

Where the evidence establishes that loss or physical damage occurred while the Submitted Item was in Concept Grading's possession, Concept Grading compensates you using the fair-market-value assessment in section 3, subject to the applicable maximum compensation coverage in section 4.

Where loss or physical damage occurs while a Submitted Item is in the Grading Company's custody, or during return transit under that Grading Company's return process, Concept Grading mirrors the compensation actually awarded by the Grading Company, subject to the applicable maximum compensation coverage. If the Grading Company awards a lower amount, compensation mirrors that lower amount. If it declines the claim and awards nothing, compensation mirrors that outcome. The fair-market-value assessment in section 3 does not create a separate entitlement for that custody stage.

Where the available evidence does not yet reasonably establish when the loss or physical damage occurred, we keep the matter under investigation and assess all available records. No compensation outcome is promised until the evidence establishes a compensable custody stage and the applicable assessment basis. A third party's rejection of its own claim does not, by itself, establish that Concept Grading caused the loss or damage.

Except for a Grading Company-custody or return-process claim under section 2.4, compensation is based on fair market value immediately before the loss or physical damage, using objective and reasonably verifiable evidence.

Evidence may include recent arm's-length sales of comparable items, relevant purchase records, recognised market data and documented condition.

An ungraded item is valued in its evidenced ungraded condition without assuming a future grade. A graded item is compared with materially comparable items having the same relevant grade and attributes. Declared values, expected grades, displayed estimates and similar tools may be considered as evidence but do not automatically determine compensation.

For partial physical damage, compensation reflects the reasonable reduction in fair market value caused by the damage rather than automatically paying the item's full pre-damage value.

Fair market value is assessed as at the incident date or, where that date cannot reasonably be established, when the loss or damage is confirmed through investigation.

Market-value changes during processing do not themselves create compensation entitlement.

The applicable coverage cap is applied after the compensable value is determined.

Compensation cannot exceed the maximum coverage actually applicable to the affected Submitted Item.

The initial applicable coverage is the coverage associated with the Grading Service applicable when Concept Grading confirms the Submission for processing under the applicable service terms.

A later general change to our published service information or this Policy does not by itself alter an existing Submission. Where the Grading Company subsequently applies revised coverage through an official reclassification, an additional fee associated with a service or coverage adjustment, or an applicable coverage rule, that revised coverage becomes the applicable maximum compensation coverage for this Policy.

You are responsible for the Grading Service ultimately selected and should review its coverage before confirmation for processing. Service-selection guidance from Concept Grading is advisory and does not guarantee the Grading Company's final valuation, grade, acceptance or coverage determination.

Maximum compensation coverage is an upper limit on the amount that may become payable under this Policy. It is not a guarantee that compensation will be paid, and it does not operate as insurance of the Submitted Item against every loss or damage arising during the submission process.

The standard remedy is monetary compensation. This describes the remedy, not a specific payment rail, and may be paid through PayNow, bank or wire transfer, or another appropriate electronic method.

Concept Grading does not undertake to source a replacement collectible. Replacement applies only where expressly agreed for a particular case.

Compensation does not automatically include a grading-fee refund. Any such refund is assessed separately under the Refund & Withdrawal Policy.

Before compensation is paid, Concept Grading may require a written settlement and release that records the agreed amount, confirms how the claim is resolved, prevents duplicate recovery for the same loss, and preserves any recovery rights against a responsible third party.

Compensation payable under this Policy is not conditional on keeping the claim confidential. Where Concept Grading separately offers a discretionary or ex-gratia settlement beyond what this Policy requires, the parties may agree to reasonable confidentiality terms as part of that settlement. Any such terms remain subject to applicable law and do not prevent disclosures required by law or a regulator, disclosures to professional advisers, or truthful participation in legal proceedings.

This section covers slab or holder damage rather than damage to the Submitted Item itself.

A scratch identified during Collection, before the item leaves Concept Grading's possession, qualifies for complimentary re-holdering only where it is visibly deep, measures at least 30 mm along one continuous scratch, and materially affects ordinary viewing or eye appeal, or the slab's structural integrity or security. All three requirements must be met.

Scratch length is measured along the longest continuous visible line. Separate marks are not added together to meet the 30 mm threshold. A longer mark does not automatically qualify if it is superficial or has no material effect under section 6.2.

A hairline scratch is a fine superficial line that does not form a visibly discernible groove under ordinary inspection in normal indoor lighting without magnification. Hairline scratches do not qualify for complimentary re-holdering. Weld marks, mould or manufacturing lines, seams, flow lines and other production characteristics of the slab case also do not qualify.

Cracks, chips, seal failures and other structural defects are assessed separately and do not need to meet the scratch-length threshold where they materially affect the slab's integrity or security.

Concept Grading makes the complimentary re-holdering determination after inspecting the slab and documenting its condition. That determination is made reasonably under the criteria above and remains subject to rights that cannot lawfully be excluded.

Damage reported after release will generally be treated as a chargeable re-holdering service, except where law or an express agreement requires otherwise.

Notify Concept Grading as soon as reasonably practicable if you suspect loss or damage.

We will coordinate the investigation and keep you reasonably informed. We do not control third-party investigation or decision timelines.

You must provide reasonably requested information, records and cooperation.

Relevant evidence may include intake photographs and records, pre-grading condition notes, packing records, shipment and waybill records, courier exception reports, Grading Company intake records and findings, and return-receipt records. No single record necessarily determines the outcome; the available evidence is considered together.

An allegation that a returned Submitted Item is a different or substituted item must be supported by objective comparison evidence, such as clear pre-submission photographs, intake photographs, recorded identifying features and relevant Grading Company records. A lower-than-expected grade, a difference from a Pre-Grading Assessment, or a condition observation such as whitening does not, by itself, establish damage, mishandling, substitution or an identity mismatch.

Opening, coordinating or investigating a claim is not an admission by Concept Grading that it caused the loss or damage or that compensation is payable.

Making a complaint, leaving a review, raising a dispute or discussing a claim publicly does not by itself affect how the claim is assessed. Concept Grading reserves all lawful rights to respond, correct the public record, preserve and present evidence, report abuse, and protect its business and reputation where statements or conduct are knowingly false, malicious, defamatory, threatening, harassing, unlawful, or breach an agreed confidentiality obligation. The claim itself remains assessed under this Policy.