Bank of Canada - "Back Door" Error ??

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

I have thoroughly examined the notes under the correct lighting conditions and there is some minor handling near the top of the
larger note (possibly created when the notes where unceremoniously shoved in an employee's lunch pail ? )

The top note is not a "pristine" uncirculated note. 

There are no staple or pinholes anywhere on the notes.

On the other hand, there is strong embossing throughout the notes and there is no evidence of a fold (soft, pressed or otherwise)
in the area where one would be expected if the notes left the printers in a Bank of Canada bundle as a cutting/folding error.

I have attached an image of the back of the notes as requested.

To make things a little more interesting for the conspiracy theorists among us I offer the following pair of notes from the same auction........

Note that these notes also end in "999" and like the $2 notes would probably have come in separate bricks if they were a printing error.

This $1 issue was made available to the general public as sheets, but not with the GT prefix.

The larger note of this pair however shows a "score line" or fold just above "This Note is Legal Tender".

I find the fact that these two notes also end in "999" highly suspicious 

Both these notes were discovered from a US dealer last year at a US show

Back to the $2 note pair...

Again, the quality of the images makes it difficult to express an opinion with a high degree of certainty.  However, on the larger note, I can see what appears to be an elongated crease running close to the top edge, and to me at least, this suggests that the top part of the note was bent over at some point.  There does not have to be a hard fold as evidence of being in a bundle.  The edge of the oversize note protruded out from the rest of the bundle and was likely bent over the top of the bundle.  The serial number ending in 999 shows us that the sheet from which these notes came was the last sheet in a ream, and cutting errors typically happen on the first and last sheets in a run.  For whatever reason, the first/last sheet became misaligned prior to a stack of notes being cut.  It does not have to be deliberate, though one has to wonder how this kind of error slips through quality control without being detected, removed and destroyed.  There will always be room for the "conspiracy theorists" to believe that these notes had "help" getting out of the printing facilities.

The serial numbers ending in 999 on both the $2 and $1 error notes points strongly to the possibility of accidental misalignment caused by the machinery.  I used to own a 1937 $100 note with a cutting error showing an extra piece, and the note had a serial number ending in 000.  I sold the note for a fair price, though in retrospect, I could have asked for about ten times as much had I tried to invent a story about it being the product of employee mischief rather than pure chance.

We have no idea as simple collectors if any sheets of older series notes were saved by the Bank of Canada and/or presented to important persons.  We only know about those series that were sold to the public in uncut form.

We have no idea as simple collectors if any sheets of older series notes were saved by the Bank of Canada and/or presented to important persons.  We only know about those series that were sold to the public in uncut form.

That is an excellent point. There have been reports of sheets of all sorts being sold to the public, including this post by kinghaku claiming he saw somebody buying a sheet of 2002 $5s at the BoC museum in Ottawa.

If what he says is true, it calls into question the authenticity of any cutting error.

That is an excellent point. There have been reports of sheets of all sorts being sold to the public, including this post by kinghaku claiming he saw somebody buying a sheet of 2002 $5s at the BoC museum in Ottawa.

If what he says is true, it calls into question the authenticity of any cutting error.

That's... interesting.  The post in question is already 10 years old, and I cannot recall this subject being discussed anywhere to any great extent... ever.  So I would be compelled to believe that this is something unheard of to most collectors.  If sheets of notes have always been available to the public, then clearly, I have been wasting my time all these years reconstructing layouts from single notes grabbed from circulation!  I don't know whether to  or  .

Unfortunately, the currency museum is currently closed.  It sure would be nice to be able to walk in there and possibly buy a sheet of $5 Frontier series Macklem-Carney notes.

As for the possibility of people making their own cutting errors from sheets of notes previously thought to have never been released to the public, the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this could be true.  And who is doing the cutting and why?  The answer to why is simple: sheets bought directly from the BoC are probably treated as any note issued by the Bank... interesting, but not very desirable.  That keeps the value low and makes a strong case for trying to add value by creating false errors.  Many phoney errors from $1 and $2 sheets have surfaced, and we know that the notes came from sheets since we have information about serial number ranges of sheet issues.  But as for who would cut up a rare sheet... I would think it has to be the dealers.  I still can't get over the fact that two surviving sheets of Canadian Bank of Commerce 1935 series $5 Logan-Wedd notes have been cut into singles.  But clearly, it made sense from an economic standpoint.  Selling an intact sheet of 4 of these rare notes is much harder and less lucrative than selling four singles.  Obviously, taking a rare sheet of 1974 series $2 notes and cutting it into common singles is pointless.  If what Elwoodbluesca said is true, I would be very skeptical about the authenticity of these "errors" as well.  Old sheets can turn up in estates many years after the original owners acquired them.  Clearly, this topic needs much more investigation and discussion.

Here is another one of these fabulous "back door" errors on eBay... 1973 $1 prefix AZ...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/231284577270

Rather affordable asking price... that is, if shipping wasn't $19.