The Dark Numismatist

I have a problem with your question. It's this : I can understand why people would counterfeit currency £1 coins, it's been an epidemic almost since the day they were introduced. But why, given the difficulty and costs involved, would anyone bother to fake a proof £1 coin? Remember - these proofs are struck using highly polished dies on specially prepared blanks. Wouldn't it be more likely that the Mint's quality control (which as we all know seems to have been declining recently) had an off day, and the occasional rogue proof escaped? As to the details you asked specifically about alignment etc, I'll leave that to others who know more about that. I agree with Peckris. Counterfeit pound coins are made by criminals who are only interested in the profit which comes with mass production. I know that there is a thriving trade in good quality counterfeits from the far east but these are for high value collectors' coins and the one pound coin has not as yet attained this status, not even the 1988 Gorringe 'rarity' (I use the term in the same way that it is used on eBay - tongue in cheek!). Looking at your excellent images I would say that the coin is definitely genuine, and from the pictures I would agree that it probably is a proof. The misalignment of the ends of the Bridges and Pathways motif is common on coins of that series and in particular the 2005 issue which, above the others, seems to carry more than its fair share of quality control issues. I would suggest that the coin may have been abused by a previous owner, resulting in the damage to the edges, there being no way of telling whether the coin had been removed from its capsule prior to your receiving it. I scrolled through your interesting series of fake pounds on Flickr, and found another 2005 with misaligned edges. Again, it is my opinion that coin is genuine, despite the misalignment of the Bridges and Pathways motif, and despite the weak strike on the obverse. I have seen a large number of genuine 2005 coins with these faults, all examples of the Royal Mint's poor quality control at that time.

Ive never seen either of the 2008 olympic varieties. So you were lucky to get them. Does anybody know if any 2009 £2 were issued for circulation ? I don't think I've seen any so far. Hi Scott, I can confirm that 2009 £2s were issued as I got a pristine example in my change on Saturday. Maybe they are only just seeing the light of day.

Hi all, Just picked one up in my change this afternoon - had to look twice at the date! Sure enough it is 2011.

I stand corrected on this, as I say my memory is a little faulty trying to think back so far! I remember I bought both sets by mail order from a dealer in Rutland, and they were separate issues with quite some time between them. Definitely very early seventies even if not the actual years shown. I would guess at possibly 1972, but I'm afraid it is only conjecture on my part. Try this Enough research. I'll shut up now No, that's excellent 1949 - thanks. That parliamentary Q&A is exactly the sort of authoritative source I was looking for. Yes I'm pretty sure that's the case - the Welsh Mint opened specifically to do the massive decimal recoinage, so Tower Mint would have handled the 1967 jobs. Though bear in mind that the halfcrown and halfpenny ceased production by 1969, no shillings were issued for 1967, florins ceased after 1967 with the issue of the 1968 10p, and the sixpence was scheduled for demonetisation before its reprieve, so my guess is that the only job they had to do from 1969 was churn out some pennies and 3d bits. I suppose all those 1967 pennies weren't actually needed, they just gave the Mint workers something to do ! Dark, I don't think you can be right about the 1970 sets - but I suppose it might be possible that the 1971 set actually did first appear in 1971, though it was minted continuously after that for a while. But equally I wouldn't be surprised if the Mint was so busy through 1971 that they deferred creating the 1971 proofs until 1972, when they had no regular issues to produce. And it now seems that 1972 - 1975 sets may not have been created until 1976!

I am not 100 per cent sure, but I did buy the 1970 and 1971 sets at the time, and I am fairly certain that they were first issued on the correct dates. I could be wrong, it was nearly forty years ago...

That is correct, Hussulo, the blanks are fed into the press with the edge lettering already in place so the orientation is completely random, and the law of averages would mean that they would be about 50/50 facing heads or tails.

Nice coin and excellent images! I would agree with Chris that it is most likely a mint error rather than a fake. At first glance at the obverse I would have said 'FAKE!!!' but the reverse is a different matter. I have seen several forgeries of the Matthew Dent design and they are generally lacking the fine detail on the reverse which is apparent on the coin in the photo. The edge lettering also looks reasonably good from what I can see - although some forgers can produce *almost* faultless inscriptions.

It is true that occasionally one pound coins are struck with a misaligned die axis, I have a number of them from various years, and the errors range between 5 and 15 degrees, so they do exist. Having said that, from the photo supplied I am not convinced that your coin is genuine and I would like to see more detail. Regarding value, such errors do not seem to be very highly sought after by collectors so I would suggest you don't hand in your notice yet...

I heard there is a gang in Ireland forging 20p coins by taking 50p coins and filing them down to size. They can be easily detected by the sharp, rough edges.

Those '98s are really remarkably good. When I found my first one I assumed it had been taken from a set and spent, then when the second one came along I looked closer at both and found that although very good copies they are definitely distinguishable from the real thing. There are others which may be from the same manufacturer, notably '92, '96, and even '83s which sounds fanciful, but I have seen several in the past few months with similar characteristics although I have noticed that some appear to have been artificially aged.

I've always liked this one-off 1988 reverse too and have always put them aside, and never knowingly spent one. I managed to amass quite a number in their early years and have a small bag of really bright ones, but of course over the years the ones in circulation have become really quite worn, but I still keep them to one side! About a month ago I picked one up in my change and was very surprised to find it was counterfeit. It is undetectable as a fake at a glance, and it even stands closer scrutiny. The legend around the edge is correct, but in the smaller typeface introduced in 1989 (although that legend (DECUS ET TUTAMEN) did not actually appear in that type style until 1991).

Hi Scott, from your photos I would say that both your coins are genuine, but they may look different in the hand. I haven't seen any fakes at all this week, but last week I got a wonderful 1988 coat of arms specimen which is quite worn and correct in every way except that the edge lettering is the smaller style introduced the following year, (although DECUS ET TUTAMEN did not appear in the smaller style until 1991), so I would date the coin as 1991 onwards. I still do not have my scanner working, but when I do I'll upload some images.

Perhaps it is a little overpriced, but fair play to the fellow, he is offering FREE shipping!

The white metal variety seem to be cast, rather than struck and look nowhere near as good as the 1992 example in your images (if that is the coin you are referring to). I understand they are cast in a white metal and then painted with car spray paint to give the impression they are genuine. Probably when new they are reasonably easy to pass off as most people do not check the quality of their change, only the quantity. Once the paint has started to flake off and they become discoloured they look awful, some turn black or brown. They are also quite soft, and therefore wear quickly which makes them even more obvious, and then people receiving them look at them quizzically and start scratching them to verify what they have already guessed - that they are forgeries! Therefore most examples seen are usually badly damaged. I have quite a nice example that has not been painted and it has the appearance of a silver proof (well, almost...). I intended to scan it and post it here today but I discovered my scanner is not working (the result of a computer rebuild last weekend), but when it is fixed I'll get those images posted.

You are right, I don't think the public has any interest in forgeries whatsoever, as long as they can spend them they don't even know they're there. There are some doing the rounds which are definitely unspendable - white metal fakes painted gold. I thought this type was mainly confined to the early years, but I have seen some of the newer designs being made from this material, although I have never found one in circulation. I picked up a forgery in the street this afternoon. I was walking down West Wickham High Street, minding my own business, when I saw a one pound coin in the road, about a foot from the kerb. As I picked it up I could tell that it was a fake - a 2003 with the correct reverse - and poorly executed. This is a very common variety around here and I believe it is from the workshop of Marcus Glindon, who was jailed in 2006 for counterfeiting. Since he went away there seems to be no new (ie shiny) examples of this series turning up. My suggestion is that he was making 2001/02/03 coins in massive numbers, and for a long time these examples, which are very distinctive, were turning up almost every time you checked your change (well that is how it seemed!) Nowadays they are becoming more scarce. It was a Glindon 2001 example that set me on this quest to learn more about forgeries.

The Royal Mint did produce one pound coins in 1998 (and 1999*) but neither issue was meant for general circulation. The first time I found a 1998 in my change I assumed that it had been taken from a year set, and I put it to one side. A couple of months later I found another, and as it appeared quite new I looked at it closely, and compared it with the previous one I had found, and came to the conclusion that both were counterfeit. I have since seen several others, confirming my suspicions. It is difficult to tell with certainty from your photograph but I would say that there is a good chance that it is a fake. As for the coin date 1992, from the photo it looks like it could be a fake: I have identified three varieties of counterfeit of that quality with that date (there are many others dated 1992 of various quality and design but I will not concern myself with them here) and like you I was unsure of their pedigree until I had seen more than one. The quality of the reproduction is very good, and gives the lie to the statement that counterfeiters cannot accurately reproduce the edge lettering. You are right to point out that they are the wrong colour as I, too, have noticed that some, but not all, forgeries of this series have a slight greenish hue, presumably from the brass content. The three varieties I have identified are : 1. A virtually perfect reproduction (subject to slight imperfections which a non-numismatist would be unlikely to notice); 2. As above but with a die axis error of approximately 30 degrees; 3. As above but with irregular spacing between 'TUTAMEN' '+' 'DECUS'. Judging by the condition of all those I have seen I would suggest they have all been struck fairly recently. *I also have a 1999 counterfeit - the other year that one pound coins were not issued for general circulation - which is also a good quality reproduction, however it is a mule, with the celtic cross on the reverse instead of the rampant lion of Scotland.

That is a really interesting coin! Thanks for posting the pictures. It certainly appears to be a genuine coin, and as a Royal Mint error would certainly generate some interest among collectors. I'm sure that there are others on this forum who will appreciate it. Great coin!

Hi, and welcome to the forum. It is impossible to give an opinion without seeing a scan of the coin. I am assuming that it is a standard UK coin with the Prince of Wales's feathers on the reverse. With a 180 degree die axis misalignment it would be a very unusual Royal Mint error. Although the forger's coin of choice is the one pound, I do know of examples of counterfeit 50p, 10p and 2p coins, although why anybody would bother with the lower denominations is beyond me. The only 2p forgery I have seen was obviously fake. Could you possibly post a picture of your coin?

Re David Bowie: I believe he was actually born in Brixton, but moved to Bromley (Plaistow Grove, next to Sundridge Park station) and attended Bromley Technical High School for Boys 1958-63, (now Ravenswood School). He was in my class at that school, and in fact we were born only 4 hours apart, although on different days, me at 11.55pm on 7th Jan, and he about 3.00am on the 8th. I think when he married his first wife he moved to Beckenham. When I took the 11-plus exam in 1958 I was a borderline candidate for Bromley Grammar School, but I dipped the interview, which was a shame because a few of my friends from Princes Plain went there, but I was happy to go to Bromley Tech because it was a brand new school then and only 5-10 mins ride from home on the push bike. I know Orpington quite well and have been in 'The Collector' a few times - bought a few half crowns there. I don't think Orpington is famous for anything except them ol' chickens...

I like the choice of typeface, very traditional and quite 'Plantinesque' with the open loop on the 'P' and the splayed legs on the 'M', but I cannot reconcile the lion and castle. I agree with the of use of traditional/heraldic symbols for such a purpose but these seem inappropriate, and do not convey anything other than a false conception of what the mint's core business is. I am inclined to agree with Brian that the first thought that comes to mind is 'chess', which is suggested by the castle battlements and the shape of the logo.

Sidcup is ok, my son and his family lived there for several years and have just moved a mile down the road to Bexley. Sidcup has the distinction of having the best Indian restaurant in the south east: Rucchi's close to Albany Park station! There's not much to say about Penge, though, except that it was once quite posh, getting posher as you approached Beckenham. Nowadays most of those big Victorian houses have been demolished and a block of flats built on the site of each one. That's progress...

I don't know anything about the artificial darkening of pennies after the war, but I do remember as a young boy in the early fifties an influx of 1948/49 pennies with full lustre suddenly appearing in general circulation, in fact they were very common indeed in my area (Bromley, Kent). I should have put some aside but I guess I was more interested in Black Jacks and Fruit Salads back then. Maybe over production of these pennies meant that it was unnecessary to circulate pennies dated 1950-2 and the 48/49s were held back until then, and the low 1950/51 mintages, being specifically produced for British colonies only, were all sent abroad.

They are circulating freely because generally people are ignorant of the differing dates/reverses and edge inscriptions and in any case do not closely scrutinise the coins in their change. I also think that the banks do not educate their staff in what to look for in a counterfeit pound coin for two reasons: (a) there are so many in circulation that if their staff were to withdraw all bad coins they would make quite a loss on those coins; ( if their staff are aware that they are passing dud coins they, and the banks, would be guilty of a criminal offence which is to knowingly pass (or utter) a counterfeit coin. The Royal Mint estimates that there are 30 million fake pounds in circulation, but this is almost certainly an underestimate, especially after Marcus Glindon, jailed in December 2007 for 5 years had produced 14 million one pound coins. In the south east where I live it is not unusual to get them in your change and I have estimated that currently 4.6 per cent of pound coins are fake. I would be interested in seeing the two that you have found if you are able to post a photo of them.

It's not only the mismatch between title and picture. The title is a coin, the picture is of a Levi's label but the description is for a pair of Nike tracksuit bottoms. It's quite clearly a mule. The winner will probably receive a donkey jacket.