Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

secret santa

2021 Unc set mystery

Recommended Posts

I recently bought the 2021 Uncirculated set from Westminster Mint because it contains the Decimalisation 50p with original 1969 obverse and then received a letter saying that I should return it as there is an error and they would send a replacement. I asked for more details but they would only say that:

"The Royal Mint have alerted us to a minor printing/spelling mistake on the packaging of these BU Packs."

I have looked for this mistake but can't find it so I'm inclined to keep the set in case there's a more important mistake that might prove to be a rarity in the future.

Has anyone else heard anything about this "error" ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very interesting Richard. I would definitely hold onto it and see what comes to light. Could you show us a picture of the packaging?

Edited by Iannich48

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even an error in the packaging can only make the set more interesting and there is no reason to return it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

Could you show us a picture of the packaging?

There's too much to show unfortunately - a cardboard cover and then 4 double sided pages. I keep looking but can't spot anything wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find any discussion on this through Google. The only "error" being discussed is the design of the HG Wells £2 coin, with people pointing out the extra leg on the alien machine. As the Royal Mint has declared this is not an error but the designer's interpretation, I can't see them recalling for that reason.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There does seem to be a packaging error with the proof set, maybe there is some confusion due to this?

https://www.royalmint.com/our-coins/ranges/annual-sets/2021-annual-coin-sets/the-2021-united-kingdom-premium-proof-coin-set/

See the note at the end of the description.

Jerry

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jelida said:

There does seem to be a packaging error with the proof set, maybe there is some confusion due to this?

https://www.royalmint.com/our-coins/ranges/annual-sets/2021-annual-coin-sets/the-2021-united-kingdom-premium-proof-coin-set/

See the note at the end of the description.

Jerry

Sounds like an A1 mess up to me. Honestly, not putting enough holes for the medal is a bad mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know they were issuing one with the 1969 obverse. I bought a Bunc one because of the design and theme . Not the sort of thing I normally go for , but I do hang onto any commemorative coins I get in my change (few and far between nowadays)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

Sounds like an A1 mess up to me. Honestly, not putting enough holes for the medal is a bad mistake.

16 weeks wait to get a replacement base pad with enough holes. Not exactly speedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through the folder for this set, I've noticed that, for the John Logie Baird 50p, they write "From an early age he showed ingenuity, setting up a telephone exchange to connect his bedroom to his friend's houses."

So, either his friend did have more than one house or they should have written "to his friends' houses."

Perhaps this is the error in question ? I will continue looking.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2021 at 10:02 AM, secret santa said:

I recently bought the 2021 Uncirculated set from Westminster Mint because it contains the Decimalisation 50p with original 1969 obverse and then received a letter saying that I should return it as there is an error and they would send a replacement. I asked for more details but they would only say that:

"The Royal Mint have alerted us to a minor printing/spelling mistake on the packaging of these BU Packs."

I have looked for this mistake but can't find it so I'm inclined to keep the set in case there's a more important mistake that might prove to be a rarity in the future.

Has anyone else heard anything about this "error" ?

No, but the fact that RM have asked you to return it, means you should definitely keep it.

What sort of company would ask you to return the entire thing - with the time and inconvenience that entails, plus the cost - merely for a "minor printing/spelling mistake"? 

Might be interesting to see if you get a reply that makes logical sense (I know that's stretching it a bit in the 21st century) if you contact them and ask what the minor error is.    

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought comes to mind. Would the intention be to issue a completely new set on receipt of the old one? If so, what would happen to the old sets?

Moreover, why not just issue a new package, and ask buyers to destroy the old packages?  

I'm afraid I'd be asking all these awkward questions merely to inconvenience them in the same way they intend to inconvenience you. 

Then when you get the usual generic response (as you assuredly will do), you can contact them again to say they still haven't answered your questions, and until they do you won't consider returning the package.

It's really good when they want something of you, and you've got the whip hand for once.  

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that they won't add to their reply above ("The Royal Mint have alerted us to a minor printing/spelling mistake on the packaging of these BU Packs.")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, secret santa said:

I suspect that they won't add to their reply above ("The Royal Mint have alerted us to a minor printing/spelling mistake on the packaging of these BU Packs.")

You're probably right. Maybe the best way is to wait for a few months, buy another, and see if you can spot the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

You're probably right. Maybe the best way is to wait for a few months, buy another, and see if you can spot the difference.

I am sure that The Royal Mint would be gutted if everybody that they alerted did buy another set, just to see the difference.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

I am sure that The Royal Mint would be gutted if everybody that they alerted did buy another set, just to see the difference.

Yeah, but not everybody will. Just those who might be interested. I would if it was me. 

But fair point, I hadn't looked at it in that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

2 x 2021 Decimal Day 50p Royal Mint Coin packs 1 with 2020 DATE ERROR see pics  | eBay

This error was on the Royal mint packaging ,although anyone who bought one direct from the Royal mint before the mistake was noticed i believe will be sent a replacement FOC.

It says 2020 inside rather than 2021.

I have used the eBay link rather than just post a picture and then have to explain.

Edited by PWA 1967
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen that the packaging error on the sets is a spelling mistake .Televison instead of television for the Logie Baird coin .

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

This error was on the Royal mint packaging ,although anyone who bought one direct from the Royal mint before the mistake was noticed i believe will be sent a replacement FOC.

This was not the set that I was offered an exchange on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, secret santa said:

This was not the set that I was offered an exchange on.

No i didnt say it was a set , its the BU single coin 50p error and just seemed the best thread to put it on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So one of the 50 pence coins is dated 2020. Is this an error, Or just last year's coin i wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mick1271 said:

I have seen that the packaging error on the sets is a spelling mistake .Televison instead of television for the Logie Baird coin .

Absolutely right - I've read the packaging a hundred times and not spotted that !

Televison.jpg.130b9236662b089108a378f1384c033f.jpg

Mystery solved - and not likely to be worth a fortune in the future !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

So one of the 50 pence coins is dated 2020

No, only the packaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, secret santa said:

Televison instead of television for the Logie Baird coin .

When you think about it, this blatant spelling mistake (in very large letters) plus the grammatical error I mentioned earlier represents a pretty p*ss poor effort by the Royal Mint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, secret santa said:

When you think about it, this blatant spelling mistake (in very large letters) plus the grammatical error I mentioned earlier represents a pretty p*ss poor effort by the Royal Mint.

Absolutely. It doesn't say much for their Quality Assurance. 

Also, at the risk of becoming a bore, the other thing I still can't quite get my head round, is why they would want the entire set to be returned because of spelling/grammatical errors in the pack. Surely it would be more sensible just to issue a new pack to the registered addresses of the buyers, with a short explanatory note and apology. Anyone with half a brain would realise that the majority just won't bother because of the additional hassle and inconvenience.     

 

 

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×