Possession of counterfeit coins

[Scion]

A while back when cashing in some bags of pound coins, rather than just
weighing the bags as they did in the past the bank cashier took care in
checking every coin and in fact - perhaps unsurprisingly - pronounced some
of them as counterfeit.
(As an aside, I've previously made mistakes when counting coins into the
bags so I always have a few spare with me to make up the numbers if
necessary. Rather embarrassingly on this occasion, I coincidentally had
the exact number of spares as were declared counterfeit.)

Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others were
less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour for
example.

The cashier retained all the coins she thought were bad.

Is possession of counterfeit coins illegal?

From a legal perspective, would the cashier have had to return the
counterfeit coins had I so asked?

A very quick Google found this statement on a BBC web page:
"It's illegal to make or use counterfeited coins and the Royal Mint says
people must hand them in if they think they have one."

So I guess by trying to bank the coins I was (albeit unknowingly) breaking
the law, but there's nothing there about possession. As for the Royal Mint
statement, I invoke Mandy Rice Davies.

[Peter Crosland]

Possession of counterfeit currency is offense if you know, or suspect,
that that it is counterfeit. Being realistic you would not be prosecuted
for having, or using, few counterfeit coins. If you are handling large
numbers, such as you are, then it might be prudent to check them more
carefully.


--
Regards Peter Crosland

[The Todal]

I'm not at all sure what powers the bank staff or shopkeepers might have
to seize and retain your counterfeit coins.

The statute seems to be the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act of 1981. I
couldn't find anything relating to the power to impound your counterfeit
coins.

[Sara]

In article <emi2t.124027$Wp1....@fx02.fr7>,
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> For me, the interesting question is who gets to say what's real and not ?
>
> I was watching the excellent "Private Schulz" recently.

Oh yes, what an excellent show. It had me almost crying with laughter
when it was first on. I've recently bought the DVD set and was
interested to see a pub I know in South Wales (The Bear in Crickhowell -
first class boozer for anyone in that area) being used as the pub
somewhere in Kent(?) that various people meet up in. Made it even more
fun :-)

> Based on real
> life incidents, the premise was the Nazis employed a gang of expert
> forgers to print £5 notes. They manage to create such perfect notes -
> including the unique serial number being valid - that the Bank of England
> official is forced to declare that "These are Bank of England notes".
> When quizzed by a soldier "so these are your notes, right ?" he gets
> sniffy and says "these are not *our* notes. But they *are* Bank of
> England notes". The implication being they were such perfect forgeries
> they couldn't be detected - even by the BoE.
>
> The game between forgers and banks (wrt to currency forging) is
> fascinating. US currency was once protected by have 1mm plastic threads
> embedded in the paper (like sugar strands). They could be teased out with
> tweezers.

I'm struggling to see why anyone would want to pull the strands out,
unless they wanted to accuse whoever gave them the money of forgery.

--
Sara

cats cats cats cats cats

[Sara]

In article <V2k2t.60820$Og1....@fx10.fr7>,
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 14:35:02 +0000, Sara wrote:
>
[snippy]

> >>
> >> The game between forgers and banks (wrt to currency forging) is
> >> fascinating. US currency was once protected by have 1mm plastic threads
> >> embedded in the paper (like sugar strands). They could be teased out
> >> with tweezers.
> >
> > I'm struggling to see why anyone would want to pull the strands out,
> > unless they wanted to accuse whoever gave them the money of forgery.
>

> Because it was the acid test for a genuine greenback. A cunning forger
> might use a photographic process to give the *appearance* of strands. But
> only a real note had them.
>
> I can't recall the title or author, but in the early 90s I read a forgers
> autobiography - he really upset the Yanks, as he forged dollars less than
> a year after they introduced loads of security measures. One subtle one
> he found was that it was impossible to photograph an entire dollar bill
> in one go - bits were in and out of focus. He had to make hundreds of
> smaller photos and stitch them together.

Fascinating. I wonder how they did that.
>
> In the introduction he warned that (currency) forgery is a very very high
> risk game. It's impossible to profit from it without creating a trail
> which will inevitably lead back to the forger and a 3 tonne printing
> press.

Always awkward, trying to explain that one away.

[Sara]

In article <a6l2t.60883$Og1....@fx10.fr7>,
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:25:01 +0000, Sara wrote:
>
> > In article <V2k2t.60820$Og1....@fx10.fr7>,
> > Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I can't recall the title or author, but in the early 90s I read a
> >> forgers autobiography - he really upset the Yanks, as he forged dollars
> >> less than a year after they introduced loads of security measures. One
> >> subtle one he found was that it was impossible to photograph an entire
> >> dollar bill in one go - bits were in and out of focus. He had to make
> >> hundreds of smaller photos and stitch them together.
> >
> > Fascinating. I wonder how they did that.
>

> No idea. If this is the book I remember (I got it from the library)
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Counterfeiter-Story-British-Master-Forger/
> dp/0450516083

Thanks.
>
> it might have more in it. As I recall in order to get the resolution
> needed to make the printing plates photographically, they had to use an
> incredibly short depth of field. When they tried the whole note, bits
> were ever so slightly out of focus - enough that a reproduction would
> stand out a mile. As I said, the solution was to painstakingly photograph
> little squares at the correct focus, and then stitch them together.
>
> Watermarks, and (the appearance) of metal strips could be created by
> photographic processes too.

[Max Demian]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 14:20:01 +0000, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
wrote:

>On 20/3/13 13:35, Peter Crosland wrote:
>> On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:
>>> A while back when cashing in some bags of pound coins, rather than just
>>> weighing the bags as they did in the past the bank cashier took care in
>>> checking every coin and in fact - perhaps unsurprisingly - pronounced
>>> some
>>> of them as counterfeit.

[...]

>>> The cashier retained all the coins she thought were bad.
>>>
>>> Is possession of counterfeit coins illegal?
>>>
>>> From a legal perspective, would the cashier have had to return the
>>> counterfeit coins had I so asked?

[...]

>I'm not at all sure what powers the bank staff or shopkeepers might have
>to seize and retain your counterfeit coins.
>
>The statute seems to be the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act of 1981. I
>couldn't find anything relating to the power to impound your counterfeit
>coins.

What if you try to pass genuine foreign coins as British? I've got a
Swazi one lilangeni coin, which is exactly the size and weight of a
one pound coin (and worth considerably less). What would be the
offence if I tried to pass it as a pound in a shop? Or a vending
machine?

--
Max Demian

[Tony]

If the person accepting them believes them to be counterfeit, then surely
they're obliged to hand them in, if they believe it to be the case. And to
hand them in, they must confiscate them. They can't let you take them
back, because they believe them to be counterfeit and so would be failing
to hand them in?
--
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
books -> http://www.bookthing.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]

[polygonum]

Is intent to hand them in a defence to being in possession? Otherwise
the very act of confiscating would cause the confiscator to be in
contravention.

--
Rod

[John Briggs]

I think a bank would be trusted in these circumstances.
--
John Briggs

[Andy Champ]

On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:

> Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others were
> less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour for
> example.

Did you get a receipt for the counterfeit coins? I'd like to be sure
that they wouldn't get cleaned and found out to be genuine.

Andy

[Adam Funk]

But if it's an offence to knowingly posses counterfeit coins, what's
your legal position once someone tells you & you say you want them
back?

"I didn't believe what the bank cashier said"?

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-20, Sara wrote:

> Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

>> The game between forgers and banks (wrt to currency forging) is
>> fascinating. US currency was once protected by have 1mm plastic threads
>> embedded in the paper (like sugar strands). They could be teased out with
>> tweezers.
>
> I'm struggling to see why anyone would want to pull the strands out,
> unless they wanted to accuse whoever gave them the money of forgery.

I'm just guessing: to put back into fake notes of a higher value?

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-20, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:25:01 +0000, Sara wrote:
>

>> In article <V2k2t.60820$Og1....@fx10.fr7>,
>> Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I can't recall the title or author, but in the early 90s I read a
>>> forgers autobiography - he really upset the Yanks, as he forged dollars
>>> less than a year after they introduced loads of security measures. One
>>> subtle one he found was that it was impossible to photograph an entire
>>> dollar bill in one go - bits were in and out of focus. He had to make
>>> hundreds of smaller photos and stitch them together.
>>
>> Fascinating. I wonder how they did that.
>

> No idea. If this is the book I remember (I got it from the library)
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Counterfeiter-Story-British-Master-Forger/
> dp/0450516083

Nuts, I just can not remember the name of the book (or the author or
the forger) I read last year about forgery of C.20 British art. ISTR
the forger was a painter & art teacher, & the conspirator was a
generous donor to various galleries in order to get personal access to
their archives, in which he would insert forged provenance documents.

(There's also the fictional but interesting _What's Bred in the Bone_
by Robertson Davies.)

[polygonum]

Just up the way the discussion included shopkeepers.

--
Rod

[John Briggs]

I wasn't including shpkeepers :-)
--
John Briggs

[Nightjar]

On 20/03/2013 14:35, Sara wrote:
> In article <emi2t.124027$Wp1....@fx02.fr7>,
> Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

.....

>> The game between forgers and banks (wrt to currency forging) is
>> fascinating. US currency was once protected by have 1mm plastic threads
>> embedded in the paper (like sugar strands). They could be teased out with
>> tweezers.
>
> I'm struggling to see why anyone would want to pull the strands out,
> unless they wanted to accuse whoever gave them the money of forgery.
>

I suspect they didn't pull them right out, just enough to see they were
genuine. In much the same way, when the Bank of England first introduced
a metallic strip in their notes, a very large number were torn at the
end of the strip where people were checking that.

Colin Bignell

[Nightjar]

On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:

> A while back when cashing in some bags of pound coins, rather than just
> weighing the bags as they did in the past the bank cashier took care in
> checking every coin and in fact - perhaps unsurprisingly - pronounced some
> of them as counterfeit.
> (As an aside, I've previously made mistakes when counting coins into the
> bags so I always have a few spare with me to make up the numbers if
> necessary. Rather embarrassingly on this occasion, I coincidentally had
> the exact number of spares as were declared counterfeit.)
>
> Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others were
> less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour for
> example.
>

> The cashier retained all the coins she thought were bad....

When I tried to hand in a pound coin I knew was counterfeit, a few years
ago, the bank cashier insisted that it was genuine. The fact the the two
sides came from different years, that they were not properly aligned,
that the definition was poor (which is what made me look at it more
closely) and that the wording around the edge was badly imprinted were
all considered less definite than that it was not made of a soft metal.

Colin Bignell

[Scion]

Andy Champ put finger to keyboard:

No, I was not offered a receipt and neither did I ask for one. It was
around 12 coins in total AFAIR, so on a cosmic scale not a huge amount but
I was still a bit annoyed.

[Scion]

Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:

There must be some mechanism whereby if the cashier disagrees with the
bank customer the coins in question can be tested properly, whatever that
entails. I could have argued the case for 3 or 4 coins that looked OK to
me.

[John Briggs]

That happened at the Tate Gallery.
--
John Briggs

[Simon Finnigan]

But what qualifications are required to be able to make that judgement?a

[Adam Funk]

Right! That's what I needed to google it up: the book was _The
conman: how one man fooled the modern art establishment_ by Laney
Salisbury.

[Borg]

On 21/03/2013 01:20, Nightjar wrote:

>
> I suspect they didn't pull them right out, just enough to see they were
> genuine. In much the same way, when the Bank of England first introduced
> a metallic strip in their notes, a very large number were torn at the
> end of the strip where people were checking that.
>
> Colin Bignell

I was 'told' that this strip was not for forgery but to allow machines
(vending/ATM and such) to recognise the notes. As they where becoming
more used at the times this happened.

[Scion]

Peter Crosland put finger to keyboard:

<snippity>

> Possession of counterfeit currency is offense if you know, or suspect,
> that that it is counterfeit.

Do you have a link to an authoritative source for this please?
I read that around 4% of pound coins in circulation are forgeries so it is
likely that anyone who uses cash falls foul at some point. Is it a
criminal or civil offence?

[The Todal]

An "offence" denotes a criminal offence. The following is broadly
similar to Peter's summary of the law, but I think "suspecting" it to be
counterfeit would not be sufficient:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/45

16 Offences involving the custody or control of counterfeit notes and coins.

(1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
control any thing which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a
counterfeit of a currency note or of a protected coin, intending either
to pass or tender it as genuine or to deliver it to another with the
intention that he or another shall pass or tender it as genuine.
(2)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
control, without lawful authority or excuse, any thing which is, and
which he knows or believes to be, a counterfeit of a currency note or of
a protected coin.
(3)It is immaterial for the purposes of subsections (1) and (2) above
that a coin or note is not in a fit state to be passed or tendered or
that the making or counterfeiting of a coin or note has not been
finished or perfected.

[John Briggs]

On 20/03/2013 22:30, Scion wrote:
> Andy Champ put finger to keyboard:
>
>> On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:
>>> Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others
>>> were less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour
>>> for example.
>>
>> Did you get a receipt for the counterfeit coins? I'd like to be sure
>> that they wouldn't get cleaned and found out to be genuine.
>

> No, I was not offered a receipt and neither did I ask for one. It was
> around 12 coins in total AFAIR, so on a cosmic scale not a huge amount but
> I was still a bit annoyed.

That sounds like a suspiciously large number to me. How many were you
banking?
--
John Briggs

[Percy Picacity]

On 2013-03-22 00:40:02 +0000, Phil W Lee said:

> John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> considered Wed, 20 Mar 2013

> 23:00:03 +0000 the perfect time to write:
>
>> On 20/03/2013 21:50, polygonum wrote:
>>> On 20/03/2013 21:15, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> On 20/03/2013 20:30, polygonum wrote:

>>>>> On 20/03/2013 19:35, Tony wrote:
>>>>>> In uk.legal.moderated, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 20/3/13 13:35, Peter Crosland wrote:

>>>>>>>> On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:

>>>>>>>>> A while back when cashing in some bags of pound coins, rather than
>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>> weighing the bags as they did in the past the bank cashier took
>>>>>>>>> care in
>>>>>>>>> checking every coin and in fact - perhaps unsurprisingly -
>>>>>>>>> pronounced
>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>> of them as counterfeit.
>>>>>>>>> (As an aside, I've previously made mistakes when counting coins
>>>>>>>>> into the
>>>>>>>>> bags so I always have a few spare with me to make up the numbers if
>>>>>>>>> necessary. Rather embarrassingly on this occasion, I coincidentally
>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> the exact number of spares as were declared counterfeit.)
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others
>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>> less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour for
>>>>>>>>> example.
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The cashier retained all the coins she thought were bad.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is possession of counterfeit coins illegal?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From a legal perspective, would the cashier have had to return the
>>>>>>>>> counterfeit coins had I so asked?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A very quick Google found this statement on a BBC web page:
>>>>>>>>> "It's illegal to make or use counterfeited coins and the Royal Mint
>>>>>>>>> says
>>>>>>>>> people must hand them in if they think they have one."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So I guess by trying to bank the coins I was (albeit unknowingly)
>>>>>>>>> breaking
>>>>>>>>> the law, but there's nothing there about possession. As for the
>>>>>>>>> Royal
>>>>>>>>> Mint
>>>>>>>>> statement, I invoke Mandy Rice Davies.
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Possession of counterfeit currency is offense if you know, or
>>>>>>>> suspect,

>>>>>>>> that that it is counterfeit. Being realistic you would not be
>>>>>>>> prosecuted
>>>>>>>> for having, or using, few counterfeit coins. If you are handling
>>>>>>>> large
>>>>>>>> numbers, such as you are, then it might be prudent to check them more
>>>>>>>> carefully.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not at all sure what powers the bank staff or shopkeepers might
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> to seize and retain your counterfeit coins.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The statute seems to be the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act of 1981. I
>>>>>>> couldn't find anything relating to the power to impound your
>>>>>>> counterfeit
>>>>>>> coins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the person accepting them believes them to be counterfeit, then
>>>>>> surely
>>>>>> they're obliged to hand them in, if they believe it to be the case.
>>>>>> And to
>>>>>> hand them in, they must confiscate them. They can't let you take them
>>>>>> back, because they believe them to be counterfeit and so would be
>>>>>> failing
>>>>>> to hand them in?
>>>>>>

>>>>> Is intent to hand them in a defence to being in possession? Otherwise
>>>>> the very act of confiscating would cause the confiscator to be in
>>>>> contravention.
>>>>
>>>> I think a bank would be trusted in these circumstances.
>>>
>>> Just up the way the discussion included shopkeepers.
>>
>> I wasn't including shpkeepers :-)
>

> Most people would be prepared to place more trust in shopkeepers than
> bankers though.

We're talking about cashiers rather then directors here - so I am not
sure that's true.
--

Percy Picacity

[Scion]

John Briggs put finger to keyboard:

ISTR it was around 600.

[Scion]

The Todal put finger to keyboard:

Ah, excellent. So had I asked for and been given the coins back I would
have fallen foul of (2), and the 'lawful authority or excuse' part gives
the bank cashier the right to possess them.

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-22, Scion wrote:

> The Todal put finger to keyboard:

>> An "offence" denotes a criminal offence. The following is broadly
>> similar to Peter's summary of the law, but I think "suspecting" it to be
>> counterfeit would not be sufficient:
>>
>> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/45
>>
>> 16 Offences involving the custody or control of counterfeit notes and
>> coins.
>>
>> (1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
>> control any thing which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a
>> counterfeit of a currency note or of a protected coin, intending either
>> to pass or tender it as genuine or to deliver it to another with the
>> intention that he or another shall pass or tender it as genuine.
>> (2)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
>> control, without lawful authority or excuse, any thing which is, and
>> which he knows or believes to be, a counterfeit of a currency note or of
>> a protected coin.
>> (3)It is immaterial for the purposes of subsections (1) and (2) above
>> that a coin or note is not in a fit state to be passed or tendered or
>> that the making or counterfeiting of a coin or note has not been
>> finished or perfected.
>
> Ah, excellent. So had I asked for and been given the coins back I would
> have fallen foul of (2), and the 'lawful authority or excuse' part gives
> the bank cashier the right to possess them.

I guess if you genuinely disagree with the cashier, you don't know or
believe that the coins are counterfeit, even if you turn out to be
mistaken?

[John Briggs]

The cashiers used to be absolutely trustworthy, but to fund the enormous
bonuses at the top there has been huge de-skilling at the bottom.
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

Even so... Do you do business in a particularly dodgy neighbourhood?
--
John Briggs

[polygonum]

On 22/03/2013 10:00, Jethro_uk wrote:

> The easiest way for machines to take notes is if they're all the same
> size - a la the dollar family.
>
> Not very helpfully for partially sighted folk though.
>
You may be right in one sense - that in engineering terms it possibly is
easiest. But I have to question it on the following grounds:

Notes change in size between virgin issued and
crumpled-up-in-the-back-pocket-for-months state. So they must have a
certain size tolerance.

No sensible machine maker is going to confine their design to work with
only one currency. They will design a universal (or at least
widely-applicable) machine capable of physically handling many
currencies/denominations. Even if they disguise that by the size of the
feeder slot or something.

No sensible company would wish to invest in machines that could be
rendered useless overnight by a decision to change note sizes. Even if
they could be hardware upgraded to a different note size, there would
surely be an overlap period when the ability to handle old or new would
be desirable? Maybe a new smaller dollar bill would be exactly the right
thing to push people towards using dollar coins?

--
Rod

[Scion]

Not that I'm aware! Anyway, the coins built up in my change jar over a
period of three or four years so they were the product of many
transactions over a long time.

This BBC article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7628137.stm from 2008
estimates that 2% of pound coins in circulation back then were fake, so 12
out of 600 is bang on.

[Scion]

Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:

I think you'd have a hard time convincing the police, a magistrate or a
jury that you were sure they weren't fake after being told they were by a
bank cashier. Certainly not worth the risk IMO.

[polygonum]

On 22/03/2013 12:35, Jethro_uk wrote:

> You clearly have no experience of the US attitude to the rest of the
> world.

>
>>
>> No sensible company would wish to invest in machines that could be
>> rendered useless overnight by a decision to change note sizes. Even if
>> they could be hardware upgraded to a different note size, there would
>> surely be an overlap period when the ability to handle old or new would
>> be desirable? Maybe a new smaller dollar bill would be exactly the right
>> thing to push people towards using dollar coins?
>

> I believe the physical characteristics of the US dollar are pretty much
> set in stone. And have been for over a century - why do you think punch
> cards were *exactly* the same size as a dollar bill ?
>
Not the same size as current day dollar bills, though, are they? But
yes, same size as pre-1929 (or whatever) bills. So not "over a century
either! Or have I looked it up in the wrong place?

I have no idea why punch cards should ever have been the same size as
any currency. Obviously it is not unlikely they would be the same (or
similar) size to at last some currency notes.

--
Rod

[Percy Picacity]

> ajury that you were sure they weren't fake after being told they were
> by abank cashier. Certainly not worth the risk IMO.

I would think he does not have to be sure, just to believe that they
may well not be fake. And then taking reasonable steps to find out
would be a good defence I would have thought.

--

Percy Picacity

[John Briggs]

2% is actually a huge percentage - it can't possibly be true. In any
case, I refer you to Gresham's Law.
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

On 22/03/2013 13:10, polygonum wrote:
>
> I have no idea why punch cards should ever have been the same size as
> any currency. Obviously it is not unlikely they would be the same (or
> similar) size to at last some currency notes.

The reason that IBM punch cards are the same size as the old dollar
bills is that when Herman Hollerith, the inventor of a mechanical
tabulator and the founder of the Tabulating Machine Company, won the
contract to build tabulating machines for the 1890 US census, he needed
card holders. He found that holders for dollar bills already existed, so
they could be bought and he didn't need to design them, if he made his
cards the same size as dollar bills (the size which they have remained
ever since.) The Tabulating Machine Company merged with several other
firms in 1911 to form the Computing Tabulating Recording Company. This
was renamed the International Business Machines Corporation in 1924.
Don't they teach this stuff on FORTRAN courses anymore?
--
John Briggs

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-22, polygonum wrote:

> On 22/03/2013 10:00, Jethro_uk wrote:

>> The easiest way for machines to take notes is if they're all the same
>> size - a la the dollar family.
>>
>> Not very helpfully for partially sighted folk though.
>>
> You may be right in one sense - that in engineering terms it possibly is
> easiest. But I have to question it on the following grounds:
>
> Notes change in size between virgin issued and
> crumpled-up-in-the-back-pocket-for-months state. So they must have a
> certain size tolerance.
>
> No sensible machine maker is going to confine their design to work with
> only one currency. They will design a universal (or at least
> widely-applicable) machine capable of physically handling many
> currencies/denominations. Even if they disguise that by the size of the
> feeder slot or something.

North America is a pretty big market for vending machines. (Canadian
banknotes are all the same size, although coloured differently, and
that size is pretty close to the US size.) I suspect the uniform size
of American notes & the relatively low value of the smallest one may
have contributed to the widespread availability there (earlier than
here --- at least I get that impression) of vending machines that take
notes.

> No sensible company would wish to invest in machines that could be
> rendered useless overnight by a decision to change note sizes. Even if
> they could be hardware upgraded to a different note size, there would

I cannot imagine the US government changing the size. They don't even
invalidate old banknote styles when they are superseded.

> surely be an overlap period when the ability to handle old or new would
> be desirable? Maybe a new smaller dollar bill would be exactly the right
> thing to push people towards using dollar coins?

I think the only way to accomplish that will involve biting the
politial bullet & refusing to print any more $1 bills --- but it will
be very unpopular.

[Scion]

Jethro_uk put finger to keyboard:

> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:50:02 +0000, Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> On 2013-03-22, polygonum wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/03/2013 10:00, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>
>>>> The easiest way for machines to take notes is if they're all the same
>>>> size - a la the dollar family.
>>>>
>>>> Not very helpfully for partially sighted folk though.
>>>>
>>> You may be right in one sense - that in engineering terms it possibly
>>> is easiest. But I have to question it on the following grounds:
>>>
>>> Notes change in size between virgin issued and
>>> crumpled-up-in-the-back-pocket-for-months state. So they must have a
>>> certain size tolerance.
>>>
>>> No sensible machine maker is going to confine their design to work
>>> with only one currency. They will design a universal (or at least
>>> widely-applicable) machine capable of physically handling many
>>> currencies/denominations. Even if they disguise that by the size of
>>> the feeder slot or something.
>>
>> North America is a pretty big market for vending machines. (Canadian
>> banknotes are all the same size, although coloured differently, and
>> that size is pretty close to the US size.) I suspect the uniform size
>> of American notes & the relatively low value of the smallest one may
>> have contributed to the widespread availability there (earlier than
>> here --- at least I get that impression) of vending machines that take
>> notes.
>>
>>

> On my first visit in 1990, I was astounded that almost every vending
> machine took notes.
>
> I'm still waiting for pay-by-bonk to come to vending machines. There's a
> car park near me where the paystation has the NFC symbol highlighted,
> but it's not enabled, so I felt a right tit waving my phone at it for a
> minute.
>
> I paid for a McDonalds by bonk last year, and the assistant looked at me
> like I had just fallen from outer space ... had no idea (a) what
> contactless payment was and (b) that the McDonalds card readers support
> it.

I liked Dara O'Briain's idea (well, he's who I heard it from first) of
loading up an Oyster card, then removing the little chip and embedding it
at the end of a homemade wand. To go through a turnstile just wave your
wand at it :-)

[Scion]

Percy Picacity put finger to keyboard:

I would counter that taking them to the bank *is* a reasonable way of
finding out, and once the bank has determined -rightly or wrongly - they
are fake then asking for them back to (allegedly) check them somewhere
else would put one on very dodgy footing.

[Scion]

More recent articles put the figure at three percent.

> In any case, I refer you to Gresham's Law.

I don't follow how Gresham's Law really applies, given that a) people
don't (or at least shouldn't) consciously weed out fakes and spend them,
and b) the Banks take fakes out of circulation. If you could elaborate
your point I would be grateful.

[Nick Odell]

I didn't know about Gresham's Law either and I have my doubts about
the application to this situation. But it sums up the present crisis
in Argentina where the USD has for many years been the defacto
currency of serious transactions and people are now willing to pay
about a 30% premium over the official value of the ARS to buy USD and
take them out of the country. There is a similar situation in
Venezuela too.

Nick

[Stuart A. Bronstein]

John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> The reason that IBM punch cards are the same size as the old
> dollar bills is that when Herman Hollerith, the inventor of a
> mechanical tabulator and the founder of the Tabulating Machine
> Company, won the contract to build tabulating machines for the
> 1890 US census, he needed card holders. He found that holders
> for dollar bills already existed, so they could be bought and he
> didn't need to design them, if he made his cards the same size
> as dollar bills (the size which they have remained ever since.)

Actually, as someone else has already mentioned, USA dollar bills are
now smaller than they were in 1890 - the bills were reduced in size
in 1929. That same reduced size has been used since that time.

> The Tabulating Machine Company merged with several other firms
> in 1911 to form the Computing Tabulating Recording Company. This
> was renamed the International Business Machines Corporation in
> 1924. Don't they teach this stuff on FORTRAN courses anymore?

I took a FORTRAN course in 1972, and they didn't cover that material.
On the other hand we were working with a CDC 6400 rather than an IBM
machine.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Ophelia]

"Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:kihss9$3l5$7...@dont-email.me...

Only so long as you wear your pink tutu!

--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[John Briggs]

They had to mention Hollerith syntax and Hollerith constants.
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

On 22/03/2013 14:35, Scion wrote:
> John Briggs put finger to keyboard:
>

>> 2% is actually a huge percentage - it can't possibly be true.
>
> More recent articles put the figure at three percent.
>
>> In any case, I refer you to Gresham's Law.
>
> I don't follow how Gresham's Law really applies, given that a) people
> don't (or at least shouldn't) consciously weed out fakes and spend them,
> and b) the Banks take fakes out of circulation. If you could elaborate
> your point I would be grateful.

At that sort of percentage (as the BBC article indicated) people *will*
consciously weed out fakes and spend *only* them, and bank the genuine
ones. The bank may have suspected you of doing just that.
--
John Briggs

[Stuart A. Bronstein]

John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Stuart A. Bronstein wrote:
>>
>> I took a FORTRAN course in 1972, and they didn't cover that
>> material. On the other hand we were working with a CDC 6400
>> rather than an IBM machine.
>
> They had to mention Hollerith syntax and Hollerith constants.

Of course. But to the extent that they talked about any history at
all, nothing before 1949 was mentioned. Sad, isn't it?

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[John Briggs]

Didn't they name Herman Hollerith or explain who he was?
--
John Briggs

[polygonum]

I knew everything there except the dollar bill holder bit.

--
Rod

[polygonum]

On 21/03/2013 17:30, The Todal wrote:
> On 21/3/13 16:55, Scion wrote:
>> Peter Crosland put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> <snippity>
>>
>>> Possession of counterfeit currency is offense if you know, or suspect,
>>> that that it is counterfeit.
>>
>> Do you have a link to an authoritative source for this please?
>> I read that around 4% of pound coins in circulation are forgeries so
>> it is
>> likely that anyone who uses cash falls foul at some point. Is it a
>> criminal or civil offence?

>>
>
> An "offence" denotes a criminal offence. The following is broadly
> similar to Peter's summary of the law, but I think "suspecting" it to be
> counterfeit would not be sufficient:
>
> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/45
>
> 16 Offences involving the custody or control of counterfeit notes and
> coins.
>
> (1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
> control any thing which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a
> counterfeit of a currency note or of a protected coin, intending either
> to pass or tender it as genuine or to deliver it to another with the
> intention that he or another shall pass or tender it as genuine.
> (2)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
> control, without lawful authority or excuse, any thing which is, and
> which he knows or believes to be, a counterfeit of a currency note or of
> a protected coin.
> (3)It is immaterial for the purposes of subsections (1) and (2) above
> that a coin or note is not in a fit state to be passed or tendered or
> that the making or counterfeiting of a coin or note has not been
> finished or perfected.

Has anyone got a useful definition of "protected coin"?

--
Rod

[Scion]

Ophelia put finger to keyboard:

You really, really, *really* don't want to see me in a pink tutu.




Yellow, on the other hand...

[The Todal]

Yes, the same statute defines it at para 27.

“protected coin” means any coin which—
(a)is customarily used as money in any country; or
(b)is specified in an order made by the Treasury for the purposes of
this Part of this Act.

[Ophelia]

"Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:kii1rm$3l5$1...@dont-email.me...

lol

--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[Stuart A. Bronstein]

John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Stuart A. Bronstein wrote:
>> John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> Stuart A. Bronstein wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I took a FORTRAN course in 1972, and they didn't cover that
>>>> material. On the other hand we were working with a CDC 6400
>>>> rather than an IBM machine.
>>>
>>> They had to mention Hollerith syntax and Hollerith constants.
>>
>> Of course. But to the extent that they talked about any
>> history at all, nothing before 1949 was mentioned. Sad, isn't
>> it?
>
> Didn't they name Herman Hollerith or explain who he was?

The name "Hollerith" was used with regard to the cards, but aside
from that I don't recall any explanation of who he was or what he
did.

Actually my professor was a Brit - Beresford N. Parlett. Excellent
teacher - made the course a tremendous amount of fun.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-22, The Todal wrote:

> On 22/3/13 16:40, polygonum wrote:
>> On 21/03/2013 17:30, The Todal wrote:
>
>>>
>>> An "offence" denotes a criminal offence. The following is broadly
>>> similar to Peter's summary of the law, but I think "suspecting" it to be
>>> counterfeit would not be sufficient:
>>>
>>> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/45
>>>
>>> 16 Offences involving the custody or control of counterfeit notes and
>>> coins.
>>>
>>> (1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his
>>> control any thing which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a
>>> counterfeit of a currency note or of a protected coin, intending either
>>> to pass or tender it as genuine or to deliver it to another with the
>>> intention that he or another shall pass or tender it as genuine.

...

>> Has anyone got a useful definition of "protected coin"?
>>
>
> Yes, the same statute defines it at para 27.
>
> “protected coin” means any coin which—
> (a)is customarily used as money in any country; or
> (b)is specified in an order made by the Treasury for the purposes of
> this Part of this Act.

Does "any country" mean the various constituents of the UK & relevant
islands, or is it actually illegal to knowingly have counterfeit
*foreign* coins in the UK?

[Fredxx]

On 20/03/2013 09:35, Scion wrote:

> A while back when cashing in some bags of pound coins, rather than just
> weighing the bags as they did in the past the bank cashier took care in
> checking every coin and in fact - perhaps unsurprisingly - pronounced some
> of them as counterfeit.
> (As an aside, I've previously made mistakes when counting coins into the
> bags so I always have a few spare with me to make up the numbers if
> necessary. Rather embarrassingly on this occasion, I coincidentally had
> the exact number of spares as were declared counterfeit.)

>
> Upon rudimentary inspection some were obviously counterfeit. Others were
> less so, being declared duff on the strength of being off-colour for
> example.
>

> The cashier retained all the coins she thought were bad.
>
> Is possession of counterfeit coins illegal?
>
> From a legal perspective, would the cashier have had to return the
> counterfeit coins had I so asked?
>
> A very quick Google found this statement on a BBC web page:
> "It's illegal to make or use counterfeited coins and the Royal Mint says
> people must hand them in if they think they have one."
>
> So I guess by trying to bank the coins I was (albeit unknowingly) breaking
> the law, but there's nothing there about possession. As for the Royal Mint
> statement, I invoke Mandy Rice Davies.
>

The bank of England are clear what to do regarding counterfeit notes:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/retailers/whattodo.aspx

At the very least you should have been given a receipt for the claimed
counterfeit coins.

[polygonum]

Thank you.

--
Rod

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-03-22, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:50:02 +0000, Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> On 2013-03-22, polygonum wrote:

>>> No sensible machine maker is going to confine their design to work with
>>> only one currency. They will design a universal (or at least
>>> widely-applicable) machine capable of physically handling many
>>> currencies/denominations. Even if they disguise that by the size of the
>>> feeder slot or something.
>>
>> North America is a pretty big market for vending machines. (Canadian
>> banknotes are all the same size, although coloured differently, and that
>> size is pretty close to the US size.) I suspect the uniform size of
>> American notes & the relatively low value of the smallest one may have
>> contributed to the widespread availability there (earlier than here ---
>> at least I get that impression) of vending machines that take notes.
>>
>

> On my first visit in 1990, I was astounded that almost every vending
> machine took notes.

I think they go back to 1980 or earlier, but they were definitely
widespread (except in airports, where you still need a roll of
quarters --- see other thread!) by the late 1980s.

> I'm still waiting for pay-by-bonk to come to vending machines. There's a
> car park near me where the paystation has the NFC symbol highlighted, but
> it's not enabled, so I felt a right tit waving my phone at it for a
> minute.

Well, if it has the symbol on it, you shouldn't feel stupid.

[David D S]

Adam Funk wrote:

> [...]

> I think the only way to accomplish that will involve
> biting the politial bullet & refusing to print any more
> $1 bills --- but it will be very unpopular.

In China, the smallest denomination note is 1 jiao. There
are 10 jiao to the yuan, and 1 yuan (up to recently) was 10p
in UK money (it is now a bit less, given the reduction in
the
value of the pound). Below jiao, there are fen, with 10 fen
making up 1 jiao. I have been given 1 fen coins as change.
They seem to be made from aluminium, though I'm not sure
(they are surprisingly big and very light). I don't have
one to
hand now, but I do have a 5 fen coin, and it is dated 1986,
though I am pretty sure I have 1 fen ones minted much
more recently than that. I am sure that it costs much more
to
make these coins than is their value.

--
David D S: UK and PR China. (Native BrEng speaker)
Use Reply-To header for email. This email address will be
valid for at least 2 weeks from 2013/3/24 11:05:19

[Sam Plusnet]

In article <C903t.93723$Cg1....@fx16.fr7>, john.b...@ntlworld.com
says...

Extract from

http://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/counterfeit-one-pound-coins

"The Royal Mint regularly conducts surveys to estimate the level of
counterfeit £1 coins in the UK. A survey undertaken in November 2012
found that the rate of counterfeit UK £1 coins in circulation at the
time had reduced to 2.74% from 3.09% (as concluded previously in a
survey undertaken in November 2011)."

So 2% seems like a fairly average haul of counterfeit £1 coins.

--
Sam

[Scion]

I have taken a different view: I don't examine any of them, and I no
longer save 'em up and take them to the bank.

[John Briggs]

On 24/03/2013 03:15, David D S wrote:
> Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> I think the only way to accomplish that will involve
>> biting the politial bullet & refusing to print any more
>> $1 bills --- but it will be very unpopular.
>
> In China, the smallest denomination note is 1 jiao. There
> are 10 jiao to the yuan, and 1 yuan (up to recently) was 10p
> in UK money (it is now a bit less, given the reduction in
> the
> value of the pound). Below jiao, there are fen, with 10 fen
> making up 1 jiao. I have been given 1 fen coins as change.
> They seem to be made from aluminium, though I'm not sure
> (they are surprisingly big and very light). I don't have
> one to
> hand now, but I do have a 5 fen coin, and it is dated 1986,
> though I am pretty sure I have 1 fen ones minted much
> more recently than that. I am sure that it costs much more
> to
> make these coins than is their value.

But the yuan is massively undervalued (the Chinese government keeps its
value artificially low, for obvious reasons.) What is the actual
purchasing power of thses nots and coins?
--
John Briggs

[tim.....]

"Borg" <saer...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kifail$a8u$2...@dont-email.me...
> On 21/03/2013 01:20, Nightjar wrote:
>
>>
>> I suspect they didn't pull them right out, just enough to see they were
>> genuine. In much the same way, when the Bank of England first introduced
>> a metallic strip in their notes, a very large number were torn at the
>> end of the strip where people were checking that.
>>
>> Colin Bignell
>
>
> I was 'told' that this strip was not for forgery but to allow machines
> (vending/ATM and such) to recognise the notes. As they where becoming more
> used at the times this happened.

the first metal strip was used in 1943.

the first ATM in the UK was in 1967 (so perhaps 2 years earlier in the US)

there seem to be a rather large disparity in these dates for them to be
connected .

tim

[Simon Finnigan]

Was the metal strip used in a UK note in 1943? If not, when was the first
metal strip used in a UK note?