I noticed today, when I went to the Scotiabank today, one of the ATMs had supposedly replaced $10 notes with US $20 notes.  If memory serves correctly, by August last year the ATMs had replaced $5 notes with $10 notes, and it makes me wonder that, with this latest development, all ATMs at Scotiabank will replace the smallest denomination with US $20 notes, and the $10s replacing the $5s was nothing more of a stopgap measure and the corporation had no intention to make the $10 notes in ATMs a permanent thing?  Could this be the beginning of a phase-in period for US $20s replacing $10s in Scotiabank ATMs?

I have a feeling that all Scotiabank ATMs will be ten-less by summer.

Dean,

Thanks for reminding me how jealous I am about your ability to get paper from your banks. But as someone who doesn't even though I try, (and I started with coin hunting but couldn't deal with the weight and all the rolling), for me it is polymer in quantities that run anywhere between 200-500 notes per transaction.  But regardless of my quantities, the tellers are even more inclined to 'count by hand' if it is a lesser amount -- like 100 - 200 notes as it doesn't take as much time.  This has to be a problem for the bottom line of the banks.
 IMHO the more they try to put polymer through counter counting machines and it fails, the more notes are being damaged adding to the problem.  What's the fix -- better counting machines?  Banks buy newer notes from the mint?  Or, perhaps they are trying but not succeeding and if so, why?

I wonder if, as collectors that move from branch to branch within our own banks, or even those note hunters that have bank accounts at all the major banks, we are in a better position to recognize and discuss this type of thing.

So jealous! 
Breanna

For weeks now anytime I visit branches of my bank the tellers have been counting notes by hand.  Today, they didn't even try to use the counting machines.  I know they issued polymer because it was supposed to last longer, but the folded corners no matter how small are catching on other notes in the counting machines rendering them useless for aging 5, 10 and 20 dollar notes which causes me to ask ... are the polymer notes lasting as long as the BOC expected?
Cheers,
Breanna

As someone who has access to piles of mutilated banknotes from multiple banks, I have observed that paper money is still being handed in in large volumes; mainly journey $50s and $100s.

As for the longevity of polymer notes, of the mutilated piles that I have searched through, 80% or so is composed of polymer notes and this is notmal, considering that paper notes were withdrawn so long ago.

What is interesting is that of the mutilated polymer notes, the majority of them are $5s $20s and $50s. Again, not at all surprising since $20s and $5s are heavily used.

I expect to see more mutilated $50s as time goes by.  As inflation continues, I expect for the $50s to become the new "workhorse" denomination.

Dean

For weeks now anytime I visit branches of my bank the tellers have been counting notes by hand.  Today, they didn't even try to use the counting machines.  I know they issued polymer because it was supposed to last longer, but the folded corners no matter how small are catching on other notes in the counting machines rendering them useless for aging 5, 10 and 20 dollar notes which causes me to ask ... are the polymer notes lasting as long as the BOC expected?
Cheers,
Breanna

Today when I visited a few branches and asked for Charles coin rolls two told me that they had been issued a few but they are gone, so I went to this tiny little branch where I am consistently lucky at obtaining new issues and BINGO they sold me 20 rolls of nickels.  Only problem is about 4 of the rolls do not have the coin backs on either end, therefore they need to be broken in order to 'prove' they are Charles issues unless they were the only new issues in 2023?

Also, wondering what will happen with King Charles coins and notes already produced IF Charles dies before they are issued???

Regarding the discussion on the legal tender status of 1867-1967 $1 banknotes, I was a 9 year old kid at the time and I was collecting coins and paper banknotes already by this time and the Bank of Canada want to have a "keepsake" for the public in 1967.  At the time, RCMP agreed to permit the Bank of Canada to produce this run of 1867-1967 Serial Number banknotes without the traditional serial number as the production was limited to 12,000,000 banknotes.  You need to consider that in 1967, there were over 1 billion $1 banknotes in circulation and to counterfeit a $1 banknote was not of interest to organized crime as the returns were very low when compared to higher denominations such as $20 banknote.

The $20 banknote was the most counterfeited banknote at the time as $20 banknotes were gaining popularity for spending purposes due to inflation and cost of living as well as the limited use of credit cards.

I can remember the Bank of Toronto-Dominion in Toronto in July 1967 dispensing the 1867-1967 banknotes by the bundles and nobody questioned its legal status.  Even as a paperboy for the Toronto Star between 1969 and 1974, these banknotes were in circulation and I cannot remember anyone refusing to accept it including the stores and banks.  At lot of people thought that these banknotes were cool which was a new word in 1967 courtesy of the Hippies.

My thoughts, Whitenite

CPMF’s “Bob” is correct - both 1867 $1 varieties are indeed legal tender.
 
Let’s ask a simple question: have Canadian banks historically and presently redeemed all $1 Centennial issue notes?  They do, because they are legal tender.  Consider the alternative: banks rejecting deposits of certain $1 notes that appear to be legal tender to average citizens.  This would undermine the Bank of Canada’s goal of maintaining public confidence in all Canadian currency.

The government and Bank of Canada anticipated that people might want to save a $1 Centennial note as a souvenir and printed 1867-1967 notes aimed at them.  While there was no intention for these notes to enter circulation, it happened.  The last post mentioned some stores not accepting the 1867-1967 notes (I recall the same) and this had to be rectified in a hurry for the sake of commerce and credibility.

JBN     

I was under the impression that the notes labelled "1867-1967" are not actually legal tender and were intended to be keepsakes whereas the Centennial $1s with prefixes and serial numbers were printed as currency.  People mistook the "1867-1967" souvenir notes as legal tender and started to spend them.  Can anybody confirm this?

 

That is correct.  The 1867-1967 notes are not legal tender.  I was only 6 at the time but remember this well as it was the centennial coins and bank notes that got me interested in numismatics.  My parents tried spending them; some stores took the 1867-1967 notes and others did not.  Banks did not at the time they still should not. 

page 2