This comparison was reported to the SCADS team by the buyer of the reperfed #72.
I love your fraud/forgery page and I wanted to give you another example of pcheltenham's work.
Many thanks to the buyer for passing this example to us. Should readers spot
more before/after comparisons, please report them to their nearest SCADS
team member for inclusion in these pages.
|Original Stamp Image||Original Seller's Description||Altered Stamp Image||Fraudulent Description|
|PART 2 of a combination auction that consisted of a Scott 72 shown here and a Scott 36 shown here.
Item Number 1343222225
USA,Washington .- 12+90 Cent, 1857-61, used.
Two scarce stamps but poor quality!Left copy: cut upper side and a small thin(3-4mm)--right copy: cut right side and short/missing perfs.Useful as "spacefillers"!
The stamp on the left was reperfed on three sides and received an extra cancel. It has found a new life on the right.
Why was the extra cancel added? Most likely to cover the reperforation job.
Also, "pcheltenham" mentions a short perf, which is the least of this stamp's problems.
Sold on 8 May 2002 by "pcheltenham" for $63.00 as:
The seller "pcheltenham" describes the item as:
THIS SAYS: short perf .............................. Take a look at the scan. What you see is what you get. This is a handed down collection comprising of (sic) over 20 boxes. Whenever there are notations on the envelopes they will be given. Some stamps have notations on the back. Wether (sic) these notations are correct or not is your obligation to determine.