fake £1's i have found

[scott]

some examples of fake £1... some a good some are terrible, i will have more other coins as i get them

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=965646 1998- pound, best fake pound i have found.... one major flaw.... no pounds were made in 1998

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=964116 - one of the most rediculous , dated 1993 with the celtic cross design (not used until 96) and the design is so poor and its not even struck aligned

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=964117 - 2000, more reasonable again alignment it wrong and legend is thicker then normal, detail is not good either

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=964499

what do you think about this one?

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=965685

[The Dark Numismatist]

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.

[Red Riley]

Found an interesting forgery today (but have since spent it) - 1997 with the Maklouf obverse and the three lions on the reverse. The edge lettering was slightly wobbly but not too bad. The thing about it though, was that it was in 'Fair' condition and this was not due to the forgers sleight of hand, but simply wear on what was presumably a softer metal than the original.

I guess it just shows how little the general public care about forgeries.

[The Dark Numismatist]

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.

[VickySilver]

I guess that a pound just really does not buy anything anyway so you have to have a handful to get anything. Really a shame that this once proud denomination is really not much to value.

[scott]

my bottom link might be one of those "white metal" ones, some white parts on the coin.

i wish they would make the pound out of a more solid material.. or make a bi-metalic.

[The Dark Numismatist]

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.

[scott]

i got another fake in my change today, 1989 with EF worthy details, checked edge wrting... low and behold its faint the proof i wanted, i'll get that up when i can.

now i got these last week... not £1.... but 20p's

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=966058

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=966059

[1949threepence]

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.

Yep, that is so true. A testament to the fact that there are so many in circulation.

The vast majority of the ones I have received are of very poor quality, commonly with a blurred strike, the obverse out of alignment with the reverse, the reverse design incorrect for the year shown and a wrong, incomplete or totally missing inscription. Obvious to the naked eye, but only to coin collectors, as the vast majority don't even look at £1 coins.

[scott]

another possible fake

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=967955

an interesting one, some details seem to point to fake, (letters on both sides scratched more then normal they usualy rub, few oddities on the ONE especially the E, and the alignment of the side text, it does rotate to more of the middle on the other side)

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=967956

what about these 2

[The Dark Numismatist]

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.

[mint_mark]

I found one of the 1998s this evening. I have to say, it's remarkably good. It looks clear and crisp with smooth fields... not at all soft. The edge lettering is good too, just a little unevenness in the graining in places.

I'll have to compare with a genuine coin from the same period to look for differences.

[Peckris]

I guess that a pound just really does not buy anything anyway so you have to have a handful to get anything. Really a shame that this once proud denomination is really not much to value.

Proud, maybe; ancient, no. Now if the penny came under threat, after near 2000 years, I WOULD get upset.

[The Dark Numismatist]

I found one of the 1998s this evening. I have to say, it's remarkably good. It looks clear and crisp with smooth fields... not at all soft. The edge lettering is good too, just a little unevenness in the graining in places.

I'll have to compare with a genuine coin from the same period to look for differences.

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.

[scott]

another one that is terrible

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=969054

[scott]

another fake 20p, doesnt look right, obverse legend is too thin, and the strange grey colour.

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view.aspx?id=969159

[Chris Perkins]

Interesting, you wouldn't think it would be worth makes fake 20p's. The 'all silver' coloured coins are perhaps easier than nickel-brass or bi-metal.

[The Dark Numismatist]

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.

[Chris Perkins]

You are wicked.

I'd like to find one of those late 60's fake 50p coins made from cutting a half crown down to size.

[Red Riley]

You are wicked.

I'd like to find one of those late 60's fake 50p coins made from cutting a half crown down to size.

The best fake 50p story I ever heard were the ones made of ice. Apparently they would quite satisfactorily operate an old-style gas meter and when the collector came round to retrieve the money, instead of the box of 50ps he was expecting, all he got was a puddle.

Not the sort of thing you could collect though...

Probably apocryphal but made me laugh.