Misprinted security feature on $20 bill

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

I would like some feedback on the approximate value of this bill. I coincidentally saw news footage about this bill at the time I received the bill many years ago. I do have an idea of its worth. I would appreciate any input. Thanks.

It was printed in 2006 and is in mint condition. See image of back in attachement.

I would like some feedback on the approximate value of this bill. I coincidentally saw news footage about this bill at the time I received the bill many years ago. I do have an idea of its worth. I would appreciate any input. Thanks.

You haven't uploaded any images but I can deduce from your post that you are talking about the 2006 $20 Journey with the inverted security features (i.e. security strip and watermark) due to a rotated sheet.

It appears one sheet was printed with this error and the serial numbers are EZMxxxx230.

The current catalogue values this error at CAD $1300 in uncirculated condition (page 424 catalogue number E27-vi).

I have attached sample images of this error note:

Just to add to my previous post.  These are the four (4) known serial numbers I have tracked for this error from a possible 45 on the sheet.

EZM7459230 - original discovery note by Winston Brown of Toronto, Ontario

EZM7427230 - PCGS graded Superb Gem New 67PPQ (see attached image)

EZM7395230

EZM7219230

I would like to get an image of your note for my register.  Thanks

Since inquiring minds need to know............

It is a little known fact that this same error also occurred on a sheet of 2008 $5 Journey Notes (AAD changeover).   

It should be added to the next catalogue under E27 - Inverted Design Errors.

Here is an image of the only known example of this error.

It was printed in 2006 and is in mint condition. See image of back in attachement.

Here are images of this previously unknown example of this error note from SteveH  (EZM7475230)

Looks like an UNC-60 possibly an AU from the images.  Worth submitting to a TPG.

It is a little known fact that this same error also occurred on a sheet of 2008 $5 Journey Notes (AAD changeover).   



Here is an image of the only known example of this error.

AAD 0588859 has been reported in July 2015 in the Coin Forum.

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=235750

AAD 0588859 has been reported in July 2015 in the Coin Forum.

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=235750

I stand corrected. Thanks for the information and link.  I have added this note to the register of known notes.

Here are images of this note for anyone interested.

The 3rd recorded 2008 $5 Jenkins-Carney (AAD 0587859) error printed on a rotated sheet has just surfaced (BC-67b-E27).  Owner grades it as AU.

The serial numbers of the three known notes are:

AAD 0567859
AAD 0587859
AAD 0588859

Here are images of the front and back of this note.

Been hanging in to these for years! One is UNC and the other AU

Serials:

AAD0567859
AAD0565859

you have pics showing these notes?

you have pics showing these notes?

I am posting images of AAD0567859 and AAD0565859 on behalf of member alicsi:

Hello canada-banknotes and alicsi,

There appears to be something strange happening in reporting of these $5 notes.

1 - canada-banknotes on december 07, 2015 in a post reported a note in a cccs holder - AAD 0587859 (87 is the unique identifier)

2 - canda-banknotes on december 11, 2015 posted a photo of another note reported in CCF - AAD 0588859 (88 is the unique identifier)

3a - canada-banknotes on february 15, 2016 posted a photo of 3rd recorded note graded by owner as AU no CCCS holder - AAD 0587859 (87 is the unique identifier)
3b - In the same post a different serial number is also reported - AAD 0567859 (67 is the unique identifier)

4 - canada-banknotes posted photos of two banknotes on behalf of alicsi - AAD 0565859 (65 is unique identifier) and AAD 0567859 (67 is the unique identifier)

Following this thread there would be an appearance that there are now 5 separate notes but in fact two of the notes have the same serial numbers.

The note reported by alicsi (67 identifier) was reported by canada-banknote over a year and half ago.

The photo of the note reported by canada-banknotes in 3a above  without the CCCS holder (87 unique identifier) is the same one reported by canada-banknotes in item 1 above (87 unique identifier).

Presuming that there was an error made in summarizing the three notes in the february 15 post in that the note was supposed to be the same as the one from alicsi but the photo was shown of an earlier note it still begs the question:

where did the CCCS holder go between the two photos?
did the note reported by alicsi has having found two at the Csino get reported earlier as only one note by alicsi or was it a different source from which canada-banknotes got the information?

Not that it matters to me but it would helpful to set the record straight.