proof set containing circulation coins

[rpeddie]

so i am 95% sure i have just received a 1953 proof set where the coins have been replaced by normal circulation coins.

anyone ever had any experience with this before?

[azda]

No, but i'd sendit back

[Nick]

so i am 95% sure i have just received a 1953 proof set where the coins have been replaced by normal circulation coins.

anyone ever had any experience with this before?

I suspect that there have been many cases where the proof coins were replaced with the contents of the 'plastic' set. If it's not obvious that the coins are circulation standard, then look at the obverse types. The 'plastic' coins will be obverse 1 and the proof coins will be obverse 2.

[rpeddie]

i will definitely be returning these

would have made sense to add at least fairly decent versions to try fool someone, half the coins that i got were scratched and the penny i suspect was even polished.

has been a new experience for me anyways, the hours i have spent looking at the amazing quality of proof coins compared to normal ones has in the end paid off:P

[Peter]

There is a huge difference between the plastic and proof coins.

I have picked up the plastic set for as little as £6 but paid £55 for the proof set.

[Gary D]

Has the case got the Royal Mint logo on the inside of the lid and ER crowned 2nd June 1953 on the top of the lid. If so someone has put the coins from a plastic set into the case. Or is there no royal mint logo and plain front or something about the coronation on the outside, may just have a small gold cross in the bottom left corner. If so these are put together by someone else and normally sold as specimen sets. Did the seller describe them as a proof set otherwise you may be on a sticky wicket.

[Peckris]

Has the case got the Royal Mint logo on the inside of the lid and ER crowned 2nd June 1953 on the top of the lid. If so someone has put the coins from a plastic set into the case. Or is there no royal mint logo and plain front or something about the coronation on the outside, may just have a small gold cross in the bottom left corner. If so these are put together by someone else and normally sold as specimen sets. Did the seller describe them as a proof set otherwise you may be on a sticky wicket.

Yes, there are red case specimen sets that are often sold as proofs, but aren't. Auction houses should really know better.

[Red Riley]

so i am 95% sure i have just received a 1953 proof set where the coins have been replaced by normal circulation coins.

anyone ever had any experience with this before?

Yes, and very recently. I put in a bid at the last Warwick & Warwick for a 1953 proof set, which given the amount I was prepared to pay, was surprised to win. When it turned up, it was just the exhumed contents of a plastic packed uncirculated set put in what looked like a mint case. It went straight back and I've now received a refund. To be honest though, this is absolutely basic - it's like putting in a bid for a horse and receiving a donkey. As Peckris says this is not a mistake that professional auction houses should be making.

[Rob]

so i am 95% sure i have just received a 1953 proof set where the coins have been replaced by normal circulation coins.

anyone ever had any experience with this before?

Yes, and very recently. I put in a bid at the last Warwick & Warwick for a 1953 proof set, which given the amount I was prepared to pay, was surprised to win. When it turned up, it was just the exhumed contents of a plastic packed uncirculated set put in what looked like a mint case. It went straight back and I've now received a refund. To be honest though, this is absolutely basic - it's like putting in a bid for a horse and receiving a donkey. As Peckris says this is not a mistake that professional auction houses should be making.

Which is precisely the point I have been making for the last 4 or 5 years about them. You can point out catalogue errors but they just ignore what you say. I almost get the impression that they catalogue them as the vendor describes, whether it is right or wrong. It's a fundamental reason why you would be very foolish to bid blind. Sure you can send it back, but that just enriches the Royal Mail. I've pointed out maybe half a dozen things in the past, all of which resulted in no auction notices being issued. Peck is right when he says it isn't a mistake that professionals should be making, but I don't consider they are. The description has to be particularly esoteric for me to consider potentially wasting a day.

[Red Riley]

so i am 95% sure i have just received a 1953 proof set where the coins have been replaced by normal circulation coins.

anyone ever had any experience with this before?

Yes, and very recently. I put in a bid at the last Warwick & Warwick for a 1953 proof set, which given the amount I was prepared to pay, was surprised to win. When it turned up, it was just the exhumed contents of a plastic packed uncirculated set put in what looked like a mint case. It went straight back and I've now received a refund. To be honest though, this is absolutely basic - it's like putting in a bid for a horse and receiving a donkey. As Peckris says this is not a mistake that professional auction houses should be making.

Which is precisely the point I have been making for the last 4 or 5 years about them. You can point out catalogue errors but they just ignore what you say. I almost get the impression that they catalogue them as the vendor describes, whether it is right or wrong. It's a fundamental reason why you would be very foolish to bid blind. Sure you can send it back, but that just enriches the Royal Mail. I've pointed out maybe half a dozen things in the past, all of which resulted in no auction notices being issued. Peck is right when he says it isn't a mistake that professionals should be making, but I don't consider they are. The description has to be particularly esoteric for me to consider potentially wasting a day.

For something as cheap as this I didn't consider it much of a risk and they refunded my postage so I didn't lose any money, just a small amount of time.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Red Riley