1949threepence

The only point I'd make is that with some vanishingly rare varieties, only low grade specimens are available.

I think there's very obvious gaps in knowledge and mechanics, which need fully explaining before we get a complete handle on how this new system works.

Answering my own question, yes it is. Applicable from 1.1.21 - explanatory link So hopefully for coins they will just insert 5%, as specified in law. Presumably then, interpreting in a strictly logical sense, they don't apply it if the consignment has a value of over £135, based on purchase price.

Is this a recent change? I've bought a number of coins from abroad, and VAT has never yet been applied by e bay - only by Royal Mail or Parcel force if they happen to intercept it on it's way from arrival in the UK, to my letter box. I know that USPS & Canada Post don't apply it either. Although Fed Ex apparently do and it's an administrative nightmare to get the refund of 15%. What we seriously want to avoid is a situation where 20% VAT is applied twice, once by e bay and then by the courier.

It's my sense of fair play. For me it's open season on all politicians. I don't revere or especially dislike any of them. Personally I don't know why anybody would want to be one, of whatever persuasion. You're just a sitting duck in a shooting gallery - just ask this chap:-

All good stuff, but just to even things up a bit:-

Who is this guy trying to kid? link Double header indeed.....

I suppose everybody is now aware that there was no mintage in 1850, and that what are effectively contemporary forgeries are just that - forgeries, but nonetheless of interest. Back in the 19th century such a tooled item might have fooled the more naive collector anxious for something unique. It certainly fooled Batty. When it sold in the 1927 auction, it probably went more as a curio than anything else. It was bought with an 1860/59, described as "extremely fine" for just £2-10-0. It would have been the 1860/59 the buyer was seeking. An absolute gift by today's standards. Just calculated it through an inflation calculator. £2.50 then would be £161.00 now.

Just clear it with the buyer that when you receive the repayment demand from RM, you can send it direct to him and he can pay it. It's identical in principle to what he's suggested. ETA: who is this guy anyway, Richard? All this talk about his website and the "greatest penny collection in the world" made me wonder.

I bet quite a few have been tooled over the years Ian, maybe well over a century ago. To make them look like an 1850.

Also, the 5 of the date is different to the first one, which was a small date type. Plus, the T of GRATIA has that tiny extension to the right of the base serif, referred to by Bramah (page 4), indicating that it's a tooled 1859 large date penny. With the first one, I can't tell definitively whether that extension to the base serif of the same T is there or not. I don't think it is. So maybe a tooled 1858.

I wondered about the WW Ian, but couldn't really determine whether it was there or not. Can't see any trace of it, but wasn't 100% sure.

What are you saying it is or might be, Ian? To me it looks like a tooled coin. Picture too blurry to come to a more definitive conclusion.

Is this something akin to Batty's much vaunted 1850? "1850. The existence of a penny, either proof or for circulation of this date is not accepted. Batty, it is true, included one (No 5319) which he believed to be authentic, but examination of the actual specimen shows it to be a rather clumsy fabrication from an ordinary penny of 1859. Apart from the botched date, the other details prove this" - sold at Sothebys, together with an 1860/59 on 16/11/1927. Bramah 1929

Possibly, but they are far from the most efficient organisation in the world, so I wouldn't hold my breath, even after disclosure. Moreover, Richard, I'd make damn sure you have hard evidence of disclosure, and not rely on a telephone call. Either an e mail or tracked delivery letter (or both) to the London HQ I linked to last night. That way if everything goes quiet for a year or two, nobody can ever say you haven't told them, as all you have to do is flourish a document. If tracked delivery they can't say it wasn't that you told them about as they should be able to proeuce the document sent. If they can't, due to carelessness, that's their lookout. I've learnt from previous negative experiences never to rely on a phone call as valid evidence. "All calls are recorded for training and monitoring purposes" - then deleted after 6 weeks. The unusual thing about this is that searching online, I couldn't find a single reference, anecdotal or otherwise, to this specific type of event (ie: item lost, compensation paid, item turns up and delivered to original buyer). Not one. That genuinely surprised me as I thought there would be some instance referred to which might serve as a possible benchmark.

Yes, quite right. It's a tough one and no mistake. Of course it could be that the buyer is just as worried about this £2.5k as you are. At the moment he holds the ace and doesn't want to lose advantage. Maybe he is concerned that if he pays you, you'll be £2.5k up on the deal, having never paid RM back, and then RM come after him as the individual holding the asset, hence he genuinely does want proof you have paid them. He may be unaware of the true legal position. I'm trying to think about the issue from his perspective. It does strike me that the guy is essentially honest as - let's be frank here - the majority would have just kept schtum, in the hope that nothing further happened. That's one of the reasons why I think the tracking position is important. If it shows the item as delivered, and he's checked it, he's got more reason to be honest than if it was still shown in the local mail centre.

So anyway, for what it's worth, I've located a physical address for RM's corporate headquarters, and a proper e mail address. link to If I was Richard I'd send a next day tracked delivery letter direct to that address, disclosing the fact the coin has been found. Legal disclosure will have been made to Royal Mail and they will never be able to deny having received it.

With regard to contacting Royal Mail, I've just looked at their website, and like all large organisations these days, they do not make it easy. There doesn't appear to be an obvious e mail or physical address, so you're left with one option, to call them. That I really do not like, and I certainly wouldn't be calling them on a matter of any importance, unless the call was recorded dated and timed on my device, which I would then immediately back up to several other device destinations via e mail. That's because I simply do not trust them to get anything right. I work on the assumption that everybody I deal with, in any organisation, especially a public one, is a potential moron with comprehension, memory, language, literacy as well as integrity issues. The "contact us" guidance on the site takes you round in circles. It is truly poor. For legal purposes and subsequent means of proof, I like things to be in writing be that e mail or ordinary letter. Ironically, if a physical address was available, you could send by next day tracked delivery as a means of proof of receipt !!! Maybe there is a physical address, but if so, I certainly can't find it. ETA: Perhaps I'm hastily misjudging them. Maybe there is an address for disclosure on the claim form signed by Richard.

Well that's another interesting theoretical conundrum, as quite possibly many buyers would have just kept quiet about (months later) receiving the coin. In which case you would still be in the dark. The buyer has presumably signed nothing which legally obliges him to disclose receipt of the coin to anybody. He has, however, in good faith, discharged his moral obligation to do so, which therefore, in turn, now legally obliges you to officially inform RM that the previously lost item has finally turned up and been delivered to its intended destination. What the (then) nuts and bolts of how you recompense RM are, is anyone's guess. I'd assume they'd write to you acknowledging your disclosure and outlining methods for repayment. I still think it would be extremely enlightening, purely from an academic point of view, to see what track and trace said with regard to that specific tracking number. If the buyer still has the envelope, he could maybe give you the number so you could check. Just a thought for what its worth. Wonder how it records the journey.

Entirely plausible, especially given that so many F14's seem to be virtually uncirculated.

Cheers Jon.

Richard, I'm not convinced that Royal Mail can pursue any claim against you, as the possibility of the item subsequently turning up much later, and being delivered, is not (as far as I can see) in their terms, conditions and exclusions of claim for loss. They define loss as follows:- There is no further qualification to this (as far as I can see). Hence, in the absence of such provision, the item surely remains still legally "lost". The "evidence to the contrary to demonstrate that the item has not been lost" surely only applies up to and including the end of that tenth day. If it doesn't exist then, which it didn't, it never can. link to RM loss/compensation rules

I'm certain that the F14 I hold, which I won at the Copthorne auction in June 2016, is exactly the same coin as the third variety shown in Ian's pics. Not only do the die flaws match exactly, but on closer examination every spot and blemish also check out the same.

Well yes, but given that the die flaws on mine are also identical (this time to the third of the coins in Ian's 2015 posting), that stretches probability even further. Unless it's actually the same coin.

Indeed. Assuming RM pursue the now void compensation claim amount, I assume their stance would be to ask Richard for it, and whether Richard is, in turn, paid by the original buyer, would be a private matter between the two of them, which RM would have no legal interest in. To be honest, it's a bit of a slightly unfair loophole as it confers advantage to the person who now possesses the item in question. Be that a coin or anything else. Maybe in such cases, the item should be automatically returned to the sender.