"How come the bank's customer service said these had collectible value and promised buyback, but now no one is willing to help when I need to cash out?" Recent complaints from multiple Postal Savings Bank (601658) credit card users in Shanxi and Jiangsu have exposed disputes behind a commemorative coin marketing campaign.

Initially promoted as "appreciating assets with bank buyback guarantees," these gold and silver commemorative coins and medals have become "unwanted hot potatoes" when consumers urgently need liquidity, leaving investments ranging from thousands to tens of thousands of yuan at risk of significant depreciation or total loss.

**Bank-Backed "Collectible Dreams": ¥32,000 Purchase, Liquidation Value at 1/3 of Cost** Mr. Lin's experience is emblematic. In September 2020, he received a call from Postal Savings Bank's credit card center (400 hotline), where sales staff pitched multiple commemorative items—including zodiac-themed coins and a "Great Journey" series—using "bank credibility," "high collectible value," and "buyback guarantees" as key selling points.

Trusting the state-owned bank's reputation, Mr. Lin spent over ¥32,000 via credit card installments on these "treasured items." Only when facing a cash crunch did he confront the harsh reality: these so-called commemorative coins lacked legitimate secondary markets, with antique dealers either refusing to buy or offering prices far below his purchase cost.

The bank’s response to his buyback request was blunt: "No repurchase services available."

Shockingly, a market comparison revealed the items' actual material value. For instance, the "Great Journey" commemorative set, sold at ¥5,980, had a metal cost of just ¥1,980—a markup exceeding ¥4,000. Similarly, a "12-Zodiac Silver Plate Collection" priced at ¥5,960 contained only ¥1,560 worth of silver. Industry experts confirmed these were ordinary crafts with no scarcity or market recognition, rendering "appreciation potential" baseless.

Mr. Lin isn’t alone. A Jiangsu-based Mr. Chen, lured by promises of "any-branch buyback" in 2022, bought two ¥5,980 coins and now faces the same dead end.

**Outsourced Vendors, Hollow Promises** Notably, invoices for these disputed coins were issued not by Postal Savings Bank but by third-party firms like Shanghai Qiji Intelligent Technology (a subsidiary of Qitian Tech, 300061) and Jingke Lian Tong (Beijing) Network Technology. Both companies’ businesses include "financial institution outsourcing services" and "precious metal sales," yet they uniformly disclaimed buyback obligations, advising customers to "sell independently."

Amid mounting complaints, the bank offered Mr. Lin a partial refund—30% for unopened 2021-2022 purchases, nothing for 2020 items due to "aged orders." He rejected this: "Collectibles should gain value over time. Even if they don’t, losing 70% of principal is unacceptable."

**Widespread Grievances** Online platforms are flooded with similar reports. Users allege bank staff pushed commemorative coins during credit card services, only to face broken buyback pledges later. Video comments reveal a pattern: from Jiangsu to Henan, victims describe identical experiences—stonewalled客服 and unfulfilled guarantees. Some creators now warn: "Always record calls with Postal Savings Bank on coin purchases."

**Legal Precedents: "High-Price Sales + Buyback" as Fraud** Judicial rulings in Inner Mongolia and Anhui have classified such schemes as fundraising fraud. In one case, a scammer posing as a collectibles firm sold overpriced items with fake buyback vows, swindling ¥7.27 million before fleeing. Another Anhui-based ring defrauded 300+ victims of ¥20.29 million via similar tactics, targeting seniors.

However, these precedents differ from Postal Savings Bank’s situation, where outsourcing partners leveraged the bank’s official channels—raising questions about institutional oversight.

**Bank’s Warning** On October 21, 2025, Postal Savings Bank issued a fraud alert, cautioning against "false 'appreciation' claims" and "oral buyback promises," mirroring the core issues in these disputes. The notice emphasized: "Absolute return guarantees defy market logic," urging skepticism toward unverified回收 pledges.

The bank’s advisory also flagged common traps: rebranding generic crafts as "rare coins," sealed packaging preventing inspection, and small rebates baiting larger investments—all potential red flags for scams.