Has any of us got a certificate that has a major error in it, apart from me?
I know it is so easy to criticize, but I have
found many errors over the years . New
Information has made many of the older
reference books obsolete. I cannot help but notice the new shade listings in the line engraved issues, and old well known shades being dropped not always with an explanation. You have to forget what
you have spent years learning. I think the mid line engraved shades will always be a problem until proper research is undertaken.
Expertising Certification
Re: Expertising Certification
Certificates are opinions, given at a certain point in time. The errors that even reputable bodies make can be split into two camps:-
1. Errors that should not have been made at issuance, hopefully rare (but they are seen) and
2. Errors that come about through more knowledge/research becoming available over time.
I think Mike Williams will be publishing his further thoughts on the mid line engraved shades in a little while. So certificates that give a shade that is delisted from the Specialised will be out of date - but that doesn't mean they had a major error in them when issued.
1. Errors that should not have been made at issuance, hopefully rare (but they are seen) and
2. Errors that come about through more knowledge/research becoming available over time.
I think Mike Williams will be publishing his further thoughts on the mid line engraved shades in a little while. So certificates that give a shade that is delisted from the Specialised will be out of date - but that doesn't mean they had a major error in them when issued.
Re: Expertising Certification
Hi Winston
Many thanks for your reply.
I got a second opinion concerning my certificate from an experienced dealer and he said that it was a mistake when issued and should be returned and reappraised. I hope that this is a rare occurance.
Many thanks for your reply.
I got a second opinion concerning my certificate from an experienced dealer and he said that it was a mistake when issued and should be returned and reappraised. I hope that this is a rare occurance.