Got A Counterfeit At The Bank
scottishmoney
This morning I went to the bank and made the weekly withdrawl. One of the
$100's just didn't quite look right the ink was a bit off. I looked at it up
against the overhead light, and sure enough, it was Abraham Lincoln's
watermark, not Ben Franklin's.
Someone had apparently bleached a $5 and printed the $100 over it. The crazy
thing was handing it back to the teller and telling her it was a
counterfeit, she did not believe me and used the counterfeit detector pen on
it. Of course it appeared authentic according to the detector pen, because
the paper was real. I had her look at the watermark, and sure enough she
verified she saw Lincoln too. The pen thing would have thrown her, because
this was a bleached $5 bill that was used, so the paper was good, but not
for a $100 bill.
If it had been up to a $20 I would have kept it as a curiousity, but a $100
is a bit much to swallow. I subsequently found out that there have been a
rash of them circulating in our area lately. The teller had purchased it
from another teller earlier whom had taken it in from a deposit. Somebody
was not careful when they took in money today.
I have always thought counterfeits were something I woudl never find -
surprise!
Mr. Jaggers
When I get a wad of 100s at the bank I often wonder if any of them might be
counterfeit. As good as a teller or cashier might be, they have only so
much time to look at the bills that cross their counters, and it's
inevitable that eventually they'll take a bad one and even pass it on -
maybe to me.
James
Michael Benveniste
> I have always thought counterfeits were something I woudl never find -
> surprise!
Congratulations on your observation skills!
"Bleaching" a $5 note to create a counterfeit $100 was one of the
reasons for the most recent redesign of the five.
http://www.moneyfactory.gov/newmoney/main.cfm/currency/new5
--
Michael Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification required)
Legalize Updoc.
som...@some.domain
he is a musician for those of you not familiar.
Arizona Coin Collector
On your posting below! I am only responding to this
newsgroup only. I do not wish to crosspost.
(rec.collecting.paper-money rec.collecting.coins)
Was this a commercial bank, or a credit union?
It is interesting that you received a fake $100.00 dollar
bill from a bank.
Go to the web link shown below. Report it just the same!
http://www.secretservice.gov/money_receive.shtml
Click on "United States Secret Service field office" to
get the local phone number in your area.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
KNOW YOUR MONEY
If You Receive a Counterfeit
Do not return it to the passer.
Delay the passer if possible.
Observe the passer's description, as well as that of
any companions, and the license plate numbers of any
vehicles used.
Contact your local police department or United States
Secret Service field office. These numbers can be
found on the inside front page of your local telephone
directory.
Write your initials and the date in the white border
areas of the suspect note.
Limit the handling of the note. Carefully place it in
a protective covering, such as an envelope.
Surrender the note or coin only to a properly identified
police officer or a U.S. Secret Service special agent.
..
"scottishmoney" <donteve...@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:oHvCk.15609$Il.1...@newsfe09.iad...
mazorj
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
news:gbe2h...@enews1.newsguy.com...
Decades ago a friend of mine who worked at a bank claimed that he
could spot counterfeits not printed on the right paper just by the
feel of it. That can contribute to a false sense of security - a
quick glance and feel as they're handling the bills and that's all the
precautions they have the time or inclination to take.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Decades ago, the quality of the BEP's printing was much better -
heavier, and the engraving deep enough to produce raised lines on the
paper. Get a five dollar bill from the 1950s and compare it to
today's fiver!!!
oly
Ken Barr
<donteve...@nobody.net> wrote:
> This morning I went to the bank and made the weekly withdrawl. One of
> the
> $100's just didn't quite look right the ink was a bit off. I looked at
> it up
> against the overhead light, and sure enough, it was Abraham Lincoln's
> watermark, not Ben Franklin's.
[snip]
Was it a small bank or branch office? Most of the decent-sized
branches around here in Kaleefornia have automated counting
devices at each teller location that verify the watermark and
security tread as part of the counting process.
When you make a cash deposit at a teller, they run the bills
through the counting machine as a standard practice, both to
verify the count and do the automatic counterfeit checking ...
--
Ken Barr Numismatics k...@kenbarr.com
P. O. Box 32541 website: http://www.kenbarr.com
San Jose, CA 95152 (souvenir cards, MPC, Hickey Bros tokens)
408-272-3247 Next show: Sacramento 10/3 (tentative, no table)
mazorj
"oly" <oly...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9f5520b5-ed06-4ee3...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
And try to find a new issue of an intaglio stamp, which were things of
beauty in their own right. They're all cheap, cartoonish offset
printing now.
Coffee's For Closers
<lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> says...
> When I get a wad of 100s at the bank I often wonder if any of them might be
> counterfeit. As good as a teller or cashier might be, they have only so
> much time to look at the bills that cross their counters, and it's
> inevitable that eventually they'll take a bad one and even pass it on -
> maybe to me.
Bah. You're just trying to make everyone else feel envious that
you "get a wad of 100s at the bank." Apparantly, "often."
--
Earn Money With Your Web Site
http://www.WebSponsorZone.Net
Web Site Advertising Directory
Michael G. Koerner
That is precisely why the $5 was recently redesigned - to improve the security
of the $100.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Jim Menning
"Michael G. Koerner" <mgk...@dataex.com>
>
> That is precisely why the $5 was recently redesigned - to improve the security of
> the $100.
>
>
Documentation, please.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
scottishmoney
"Jim Menning" <jmennin...@new.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9066e$48db9e5a$31...@news.teranews.com...
>
> "Michael G. Koerner" <mgk...@dataex.com>
>>
>> That is precisely why the $5 was recently redesigned - to improve the
>> security of the $100.
>>
>>
>
> Documentation, please.
>
Series 2006 notes, the colourised ones at least. So if you have a couple of
fivers, one say 2001 or 2003, and then one of the colourised 2006's you will
notice the change.
Jim Menning
Wrong answer. Where does the government say they did this "to improve the security
of the $100" bill?
The link provided earlier only mentioned this to make it more visible to vision
impaired persons.
http://www.moneyfactory.gov/newmoney/main.cfm/currency/new5
"Other Features:
Low-Vision Feature: The large, easy-to-read number "5" in the lower right corner on
the back of the bill, which helps those with visual impairments distinguish the
denomination, is now enlarged in the new $5 bill design and printed in high-contrast
purple ink."
Nick Knight
>Wrong answer. Where does the government say they did this "to improve the
>security of the $100" bill?
It took me about 45 seconds of googling to find this:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/28/20060628-094637-3384r/
"But officials said changed their minds in part so they can respond to a new
scam in which counterfeiters are bleaching the ink off $5 notes and then
printing counterfeit $100 bills on the bleached paper. 'We have to stay
ahead of any threats we see evolving," said Larry Felix, director of the
Bureau of Engraving and Printing'"
Nick
Jim Menning
"Nick Knight" <bhnc...@mr2ice.com> wrote in message
news:48e2dc48$1$avpx$mr2...@news.east.cox.net...
Thanks Nick.
I'd still like to see more posters here back up their statements with documentation
rather than just assuming everyone will take their statements to be absolute fact.
The official government declaration to the public for the redesign of the $5 bill
made no mention of the bleaching $5 bills and printing over them. That's why I asked
for supporting evidence, which Michael seemed unable to do.
Even the article you quote mentions the issuance of the redesigned $5 bill to be only
"in part" due to the bill bleaching, not "precisely why the $5 was recently
redesigned" as Mr. Koerner suggests.
I would suggest the reason for the almost full redesign of the $5 bill was to make it
itself less duplicable, rather than to prevent them from being used to create fake
$100 bills out of. Not surprising to me, that is what the official government link I
quoted earlier stated.
PC
>
> "Nick Knight" <bhnc...@mr2ice.com> wrote in message
> news:48e2dc48$1$avpx$mr2...@news.east.cox.net...
>> In <9b93c$48e2b63a$27...@news.teranews.com>, on 09/30/2008
>> at 06:26 PM, "Jim Menning" <jmennin...@new.rr.com> said:
>>
>>>Wrong answer. Where does the government say they did this "to improve
>>>the
>>>security of the $100" bill?
>>
>> It took me about 45 seconds of googling to find this:
>>
Wow, Nick is so cool. Only 45 seconds! I bow to his greatness.
MJKolodziej
>>
>> "But officials said changed their minds in part so they can respond to a
>> new
>> scam in which counterfeiters are bleaching the ink off $5 notes and then
>> printing counterfeit $100 bills on the bleached paper. 'We have to stay
>> ahead of any threats we see evolving," said Larry Felix, director of the
>> Bureau of Engraving and Printing'"
>>
>> Nick
>
> Thanks Nick.
>
> I'd still like to see more posters here back up their statements with
> documentation rather than just assuming everyone will take their
> statements to be absolute fact.
It's not like everyone is going to believe what's said on USENET and take it
back to the coffee shop and repeat it. Yeah, some are, and I get a kick out
of them sometimes.
>
> The official government declaration to the public for the redesign of the
> $5 bill made no mention of the bleaching $5 bills and printing over them.
> That's why I asked for supporting evidence, which Michael seemed unable to
> do.
>
> Even the article you quote mentions the issuance of the redesigned $5 bill
> to be only "in part" due to the bill bleaching, not "precisely why the $5
> was recently redesigned" as Mr. Koerner suggests.
>
> I would suggest the reason for the almost full redesign of the $5 bill was
> to make it itself less duplicable, rather than to prevent them from being
> used to create fake $100 bills out of.
Are you sure? If you were going to counterfeit a bill would you do a $5 or
a $100?
Not surprising to me, that is what the official government link I
> quoted earlier stated.
mk
stuck at the coffee shop trying to earn a hunert dollar bill.
Jim Menning
"MJKolodziej" <mjmwcsREMOV...@htcomp.net> wrote in message
news:u9CdnWCRUKDvB37V...@posted.hometowncomputing...
>
>
>>
>> I would suggest the reason for the almost full redesign of the $5 bill was to make
>> it itself less duplicable, rather than to prevent them from being used to create
>> fake $100 bills out of.
>
> Are you sure? If you were going to counterfeit a bill would you do a $5 or a $100?
>
>
Ask Francis Leroy Henning.
$5 bills pass without much scrutiny. I've never seen a store clerk use the detector
pen on anything less than a $20 bill.