Stamps/professional seller?17 messages

One of the major Belgian professional stamp sellers offers a counterfeit Y Belgium 37.

I try to point this out to him (it is abundantly clear that the stamp offered bears at least one more element than the real stamp) .

And then you get such an answer from this professional:

Désolé, cela fait 10 ans que je suis professionnel, que je fais des attestation d'expertise et notament pour les timbres 37 de Belgique et jamais je ne me sers du coin supérieur pour déterminer si un timbre est faux

With this answer, this professional proves in reality that he does not know at all can detect counterfeit 37! And this notwithstanding his own statement that he even issues certificates of expertise, while the evidence is there that he does not recognize all false elements!

The stamp continued to be offered and was sold at a higher price than what these 37 usually go for. !

As a buyer, apparently you always get the short end?

What is the value of a 'certificate of authenticity' if at least one specialist is unable to detect a counterfeit stamp?

I have previously asked to make the discussion accessible by not referring to OCB or Yvert numbers, but to Catawiki numbers. And if they are not in the catalog, please indicate where the differences are. It is a mystery to me and the other non OCB or Yvert owners as to what kind of stamp it is. It could be these , but also this one or perhaps this one . Again, I kindly but urgently ask for the discussion to be made accessible.

If you search through catalog within Belgium on nr 37, you will get the following in first place:

http://www.catawiki.be/catalogus/postzegels/landen-gebied/belgie- call / 313275-king-leopold-ii? area = 831c8da31bc02e429f915e78f6f9845ec6dee3e6

This is the most counterfeit Belgian stamp ever.

There is a study that removes the forgeries, study that the Belgian specialist obviously does not know.

In addition, the 37 that will be auctioned tomorrow in the stamp auction (BE), which is also a forgery and even a forgery of the clearest kind.

http://veiling.catawiki.be/lots / 1660493-belgie-1869-leopold-ii-obp-37a? Previous = favorites

Compare the offered stamp with another 37 from the Catawiki catalog:

http: / /assets.catawiki.nl/assets/1/f/8/2/f8239b30-df84-012b-da35-001ff3cf7282.jpg

At the top left there is a strong deviation from the original, as well as at the top right ( but less recognizable if you don't know where to look for the).

An auctioneer's estimate of € 325 - € 500 ???

Counterfeit 37 at best case offered for less than 25 € as a study object!

Bad photo at that auction, for such an expensive stamp.

Would it be stamp on the back then also false ?

PS And how do I know the image in the Catawiki catalog is real?

Omdat de afbeelding in de Catawiki catalogus overeenstemt met de zegels die ikzelf heb (zowel een 37 als een 37A), alsmede overeenstemt met de afbeelding in een pdf die alle vervalsingselement weergeeft (zie verder).

Zelfs de stempels op de achterzijde van de postzegels worden nagemaakt.

En er zijn zelfs echtheidscertificatenvan dergelijke postzegels in omloop  die namaak zijn (en waar de handtekening zelfs soms afwijkt van de echte handtekening van de expert)!

Voor de zegel 37 heb je evenwel een prachtig pdf die alle gebreken aantoont van de vervalsingen (vervalsers zijn evenwel intelligent en namaakzegels vertonen meestal dan nog een zware afstempeling die de duidelijkste elementen - die een vervalsing aantonen - wegsteken).

In een oudere catawiki forum reactie wordt de link daarnaartoe aangegeven.

Deze pdf is echter in het frans en noemt 'faux37.pdf'.

Met deze faux37.pdf kan je dit meermaals op het internet terugvinden.

Because the image in the Catawiki catalog corresponds to the stamps I own (both a 37 and a 37A), and also corresponds to the image in a PDF that shows all counterfeit elements (see below).

Even the stamps on the back of the stamps are counterfeited.

And there are even certificates of authenticity of such stamps in circulation that are counterfeit (and where the signature sometimes differs from the real signature of the expert)!

For stamp 37, however, you have a beautiful PDF that shows all the flaws of the forgeries (counterfeiters are intelligent, however, and counterfeit stamps usually have a heavy cancellation that hides the most obvious elements - which indicate a forgery).

In an older catawiki forum response the link to it is indicated.

However, this pdf is in french and is called 'faux37.pdf'.

With this faux37.pdf you can find it several times on the internet.

Although stamps hardly interest me, I think it would be very useful to make collectors of Belgian stamps aware of this issue, but very few people are reached with this forum. As long as it is prohibited to include examples of forgeries in the catalog, a background page (for the series 1869 King Leopold II ), with a link to the mentioned pdf, is probably more effective.

Counterfeits are a serious problem.

The worst element here is that in some cases dealers themselves will knowingly sell counterfeit as genuine, just because they sell the counterfeit very cheaply. and resell it as real at extreme prices.

Last year I experienced something unbelievable in this regard (the relevant postings in an anti-questions forum are proof though!).

In that forum you have a mixture of collectors of antiques (and by collectors I mean individuals who own individual pieces worth several $ 100,000, not your 'daily' collectors).

On that forum you also have antiques dealers.

One day such a collector posts a photo of his collection. These are Egyptian antiques with a high value.

Out of nowhere comes a response (with a name of the person who responds) from someone who in the past counterfeited ants that were sold at the highest prices and where there are currently several of them in the most famous international museums (which of course claim that their items are real and not forgeries!).

Ok, in that response this - previously forger - indicates which pieces of his hand (and there were several). But that wasn't the incredible (yet), follow on.

There are various reactions from a few collectors and a few dealers who are indignant that this one (previously, now he makes and sells beautiful counterfeit pieces, on a official way, but ....) with his background takes care of these problems.

The former counterfeiter responds to the amazement of probably many there with a statement between these 'accusers' who regularly buy documents from him and even concrete with the question to one of the responding dealers whether he should no longer receive his order (with a detailed list).

This was SO funny.

Just a little bit background info: during his forging period he made pieces with accompanying letters (all forgeries) from the most extreme archaeologists (letters with the original signature of the Tutankhamun Howard Carter that make a piece 'real' for example) into pieces that are linked to the Titanic (back with letters indistinguishable from real old documents). I have always found these last pieces to be the funniest piece he has made (it proves how a buyer makes them deceive himself, it was so obvious it couldn't possibly be a real piece).

The Evidence there is in the forum posts that there are collectors with collections of the highest values as well as (some) dealers in these pieces deliberately mislead others (deliberate deception and scams seem to me to be the correct words here, in the case of collectors these deceive themselves of course, unless they resell them which actually happens sometimes).

Zo lang het verboden is om voorbeelden van vervalsingen op te nemen in de catalogus,

ik ben van mening dat je vervalsingen juist in de catalogus moet opnemen, zodat iedereen zelf kan zien hoe een vervalsing eruit ziet. Zet daarbij bij Bijzonderheden ook een opsomming voor zover bekend van deze fouten.

Tenslotte mag Mein Kampf ook in de catalogus, maar alleen niet verkocht worden...

As long as it is prohibited to include examples of counterfeits in the catalogue,

I believe that you should include counterfeits in the catalog so that everyone can see for themselves what a counterfeit looks like. Include a list of these errors, as far as known, under Details.

Finally, Mein Kampf may also be included in the catalogue, but only not for sale...

In the meantime I have not been able to find a rule that prohibits forgeries (especially of stamps) in the catalog, so maybe I am mistaken.

(Which of course does not change the meaning of my argument: people who having the correct information makes far too little use of the possibilities offered by background pages.)

De betreffende pdf is zo volledig dat deze best opgenomen wordt bij de 37 en 37 A.

Je hebt 2 soorten van vervalsingen, een eerste soort zijn vervalsingen die gemaakt worden door een vervalser in opdracht van een derde (meestal bestemd voor doorverkoop vanwege de opdrachtgever). Hier zal de vervalser bijna altijd een duidelijk element opnemen in zijn vervalsingen (de pdf, met de resem aanwijzingen, is hier het bewijs van).

Daarnaast heb je natuurlijk vervalsers die stukken namaken om ze zelf te verkopen. Bij deze zal je bijna onmogelijk kunnen vaststellen dat het vervalsingen zijn (alhoewel mijn vorige reactie inzake de Britse vervalser van voornamelijk Egyptische antikwiteiten bewijst dat die zelf zijn vervalsingen kan herkennen).

Experts hebben dat echter nooit gekund. ZOals vermeld staan zijn vervalsingen in de bekendste internationale musea.

Wat hij nu nog maakt zijn replica waar hij natuurlijk elementen gaat in opnemen die aantonen dat zij niet de echte zijn.

Wmaar kopers hebben daar geen verhaal aan.

Hetgeen aangeeft dat ivm met de postzegel 37, waar een overduidelijke pdf van bestaat die vervalsingen laat detecteren,  potentiële kopers deze best gemakkelijk kunnen terugvinden bij de catalogusitems.

Ondertussen staat de vervalste 37 nog steeds in de veiling niettegenstaande de betreffende veilingmeester gisteravond via een direct bericht hiervan in kennis werd gesteld?

Misschien kan iemand anders hem een link doorgeven naar de pdf?
 

The PDF in question is so complete that it is best included with the 37 and 37 A.

There are 2 types of counterfeits, the first kind are counterfeits that are made by a counterfeiter on behalf of a third party (usually intended for resale by the client). Here, the forger will almost always include a clear element in his forgeries (the pdf, with the series of clues, is proof of this).

In addition, of course, you have counterfeiters who copy pieces to sell them themselves. It's almost impossible to determine that these are counterfeits (although my previous response to the British counterfeiter of mostly Egyptian antiquities proves that he can spot his counterfeits himself).

However, experts have never been able to do that. As mentioned, his forgeries are in the most famous international museums.

What he still makes now are replicas in which he will of course include elements that show that they are not the real thing.

But buyers have no recourse to that.

Which indicates that with regard to the stamp 37, of which there is an obvious PDF that detects counterfeits, potential buyers can easily find it among the catalog items.

In the meantime, the counterfeit 37 is still up for auction despite the relevant auctioneer being notified by direct message last night?

Maybe someone else can pass him a link to the pdf?

@ book warehouse

You are nothing with photos of forgeries because they are very small elements (such as with the 37 from the auction where it is the common deviation in the left and right top corner, the largest set of forgeries).

The PDF indicates clearly recognizable points.

The 37 from the auction has a poor photo and a few other elements that indicate that it is a forgery (The 'V' strand of hair seems to me to be in the wrong as well, but is unclear from the photo).

Auctioneers on Catawiki and forgeries = the proverbial battle against windmills ...

MAR 31, 2015 | 01:59 PM CEST
(name) replied:

Dear

Since this stamp was inspected (stamp on the back) by an expert, who actually had the stamp in his hands, we assume that it is genuine.

MVG (name )

So such a stamp cannot be copied? sigh.

Maybe Catawiki can add an element as a subtitle that also starts with 'CA'?

caveat emptor

With respect for the passing of all elements, here is the last comment.

MAR 31, 2015 | 2:39 PM CEST
(name) replied:

Dear Patrick,

This study is indeed a good guideline.
And already known to me.

We still assume that if an expert has made his mark , this is a genuine copy.
Should the buyer have any doubts, he may always consult another expert and if it is a counterfeit copy, all costs (including inspection costs) will be refunded by the seller.

MVG (name)

Is this the official position of Catawiki?

I certainly have a few reservations about this. Buyers bidding on this stamp are completely unaware that it is a forgery. So even after delivery of the stamp, they will not have any objections.

Als de veilingmeester dat echt zegt, dan is hij helaas veel te dom om de naam veilingmeester waardig te zijn.

Het na maken van certificaten is vaak nog vele malen makelijker dan het object zelf.

Is wel een giga dooddoener van de ''veiling''meester (als het echt waar is)

If the auctioneer really says that, then unfortunately he is much too stupid to be worthy of the name auctioneer.

Copying certificates is often much easier than the object itself.

Is a huge cliché of the ''auction''master (if it's really true)

Het grootste probleem heb ik met

Schatting veilingmeester: € 325 - € 500

De veilingmeester geeft hierbij aan dat de postzegel zonder twijfel (volgens Catawiki, waar daar staat hij voor) echt is, want hij heeft een dergelijke niet te onderschatten waarde.

Het komt mij voor dat Catawiki - samen met de verkoper - dan ook verantwoordelijk is als de koper op welk moment ook bewust wordt dat het een vervalsing is.

Als de koper zijn/haar geld niet kan recuperen bij de verkoper dan lijkt Catawiki mij mee verantwoordelijk hiervoor, ongeacht wat zij plaatsen in hun gebruikersvoorwaarden.

The biggest problem I have with

Auctioneer estimate: €325 - €500

The auctioneer hereby indicates that the stamp is without doubt (according to Catawiki, what it stands for) is genuine, because it has such a value that should not be underestimated.

It seems to me that Catawiki - together with the seller - is therefore responsible if the buyer becomes aware at any time that it is a counterfeit.

If the buyer cannot recover his/her money from the seller, then Catawiki seems to me to be partly responsible for this, regardless of what they say in their terms of use.