tps.org.au

I guess this item fits under the "funny business" aspect to this category .... more like a couple of unsubstantiated claims though.

This item was listed on eBay during April 2012 The first claim that BN72 (either type) has not been seen is not true - Hardinge rates BN72 as 'RRRRR', not NNS.

The second claim that this is an example of BN72 is rather fanciful to say the least.

I wrote to the vendor and he thanked me politely for my assistance ...I think he then added 'may be 73 or 74' but certainly did not change the
original claim in the description header!

yet again ...caveat emptor ! (fortunately, there were no bids on this item when I 'captured' an image about 8 hours before closure)

This is in the (not so) funny business category .....

eBay seller "yeoldecoinco' has been offering these photocopies from Part I and II of the "Green Books" for a while now
As I understand it, according to the Australian 1968 Copyright Act, even if the photocopies constituted less than 10% of the publication (which they do not), it is illegal to SELL
such facsimiles of any publication still under copyright (the "Green Books" definitely are). This would also apply to selling such an item in any country which is a signatory to any
international copyright agreements with Australia.

read about it here and the entire act here
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2010C00476

I have sent a request to the seller via eBay for an image of the front page of the "publication" - I eagerly await a response.

Footnote: I received two responses from the vendor to general questions such as "can I have a scan of the front cover?" etc. He identified the publications without disclosing
that he is offering facsimiles for sale. I have the feeling that he has an ethics "blind spot" when it comes to offering such material for sale but then ignorance of the law is not a defence.

A QUERY RE BN361 (PIEMAN BRIDGE)

I have seen several nearly identical strikes of BN361 on 2d Pictorials over the last 10 years or so

...here's a couple I managed to keep images of with 'hollow' numbers and smudged bars is it possible that these are not the real thing? I cannot recall
any other barred numeral cancellers producing consistent 'hollow' numbers.

Also, the second example above is not on a recess printed stamp!

If you have an example of BN361 that looks different than these or you have information about this 'suspicious' cancel, can you please post it here?

The 361 numeral is known used late at Mt Hicks Upper on the 2d lithographed. I have seen it tied on cover and the numeral looked worn and hollow

Malcolm

thanks Malcolm ...I forgot about the re-allocation to Mount Hicks Upper and it's late use (to 1902 I think)

what do you think about the top of the '1'? It doesn't appear to be the correct shape?

I found my scan which shows the tie to Mount Hicks Road

Here is another forged BN52 cancel. A comparison of this forged BN52 with the 3 known genuine BN52 types shows distinct differences. This forgery is also different from the forged BN52 that Ross posted earlier under this topic. I captured this scan several years ago from an online auction site but don't remember from where.

Heads up and buyers beware! A number of fake BN cancels have just shown up on ebay. The vendor is from Belgium and I saw about 20 different lots that showed various BNs (numbers 16, 52, 59, 81, and Hobart dumb cancel) applied over fiscally used stamps. Attached is one example.

Jerry,
I have just seen the same lots. It would not surprise me at all to see a fiscal cancel with a BN indicating reuse of a duty stamp for postage but it does look very unusual in that there is such a large number of multiples of the 6d and 1/- values with good BN cancells. Heres another Ebay item number from matthijs_philatelie: 373025983856 These items are already getting bids.

Pete

Pete -- In my opinion, these are not reuse of fiscally used stamps and they are not good BN cancels. I have compared the numerals of all the items to genuine examples and all the numerals are different from the originals indicating to me they are fakes. Jerry

Very happy to accept your opinion on this Jerry. There have also been fake first allocation BNs on eBay coming our of Sydney for a while as well. I think the stamps are fake too - possibly colour photocopies. I wonder if they are related.

Yes have noticed a few more than usual fiscal use Chalons with Barred Numerals offered for sale. Spring Hill has had a few appear recently. I have attached the images for perusal.

the 85 is the most convincing but all are fakes. The top bar of the 59 is more sloped than the original. 60 the spacing between the bars is greater etc.