Since you mentioned it, I took a closer look and on the obverse at that point is the G of DG. It looks at though something had dropped on it, but didn't pierce it. It is just a small bump on the reverse at the S. But all the more reason to have it checked by the professionals. Thanks for your help, Rob, and thanks to everyone who gave me information today. It really helps a lot. Usually when it's small and round it's an attempted piercing because it requires quite a bit of force aimed at one point to make this type of mark. This won't help it's value, though in that grade will still be desirable and an attempted piercing would give further credibility to it being genuine as this was usually contemporary. You might struggle to find someone in the States who is familiar with this coinage. The grading companies make a lot of mistakes on British coins ranging from inaccurate grading through to inaccurate attribution with cases known of cleaned, artificially toned and forgeries - so I would give them a miss despite their claims. This is basically down to not being familiar with the coins they are looking at. What you need is someone who can tie the dies to known genuine pieces at the microscopic level. If you know how and where it was acquired it would be helpful as this would possibly lead to a provenance which could be checked against old sales catalogues. It looks good enough to have been in a few quality collections and high enough in grade to be illustrated. I do appreciate your help and I will check further with the owner. It belonged to his uncle but he passed a way a few years ago and from what I've seen of other items I've been asked to sell, there doesn't seem to be very good record keeping or what there was was lost or trashed, but I'll check to be sure. I'll post again when I get more information.