Possible $5 Journey Fake

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

Hi all. I am undecided as to this note- the gold leaves are barely visible, and the microprinting above the portrait doesn't look quite right. The really weird thing is the UV light features- the words Banque Du Canada/ Bank of Canada are completely missing from the front, and it has flourescent snowflakes on the back of the note  :-/ The intaglio printing feels OK. Has anyone else seen a note like this? Original scans available upon request. The other intruiging thing about this note is the serial number- it falls within the HOR 1.34-1.48 insert range!  

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

/me

[attachment deleted by admin]

Here is the other side of the note- the UV snowflakes are above the two children on the upper left. next to the 5...  

Fenian

[attachment deleted by admin]

I notice that for being in such worn condition, there are not any rips or tears on the perimeter that I can see.

Is this comparable to other notes of the same wear?
Or could this be some section of note that is involved in this potential paper change situation?

Maybe just note this serial number down, and see what happens over the next few months.

Hi There,

I Have several HOR Notes in that range that had faded Gold Flags. Seems to have been a printing error.  

I Got my notes right out of a brick. I had about 15 notes like that.  8-)

Also, it appears that note is an Insert!  

Not sure what to say...  :-/

Thanks for the replies folks. Last night, I took the note into a completely dark room and checked it under black light. The entire note glowed a completely different hue from the other notes I tested it beside(another HOH 1.36M insert, HOW possible test note, HOU, HNA) .  All of the other notes glowed a very deep violet, almost indigo, while the suspect note appeared to be several shades lighter...

X-Savior, you should try some of your faded gold flag notes under black light against other notes and see what they look like...

Thanks all,

Might the observed effects have resulted from the note having gone through the laundry?  That would account for its worn appearance, and the detergent might possibly have messed up whatever the ultraviolet agent is, and partially removed the gold maple leaves.  If the supposedly intaglio portions are indeed raised, I doubt very much if it's a counterfeit.

I Will check mine under Ultravilolet!

I Like Bob's theory as this happens to EVERYONE sometime or another.  

I don't think there has been a study conducted to see how washing them effects their security features.  :-/

Going through the laundry is an interesting speculation- shall I acquire a few different notes(eg HOU, HOH, HN*) and put them thorugh the wash?    

Or shall I pick the rattiest looking note I can find and check it out under UV light? I just found a keychain UV light that I love...


Fenian

If I were you I'd spend it! 8-)

 

If the supposedly intaglio portions are indeed raised, I doubt very much if it's a counterfeit.

Perhaps, but if the note is a counterfeit and was created using a laser printer, there would be some degree of "raised printing". It could be just enough to fool some people.

The key point is microprinting. Turn on your scanner and do the highest resolution scan you can for a single square centimetre anywhere on the note. 1200dpi should be sufficient. You should be able to clearly read the microprinting, and it should not appear to be printed using tiny parallel lines, or drops of ink that make the letters fuzzy or the ink run. Crisp and clear is the name of the game when looking at authentic microprinting.

A drop of water on the suspected note is a usual sure fire way of checking a notes authenticity, as with most fakes the ink will run when wet.

Most, yes; all, no. I have seen several notes where water would not at all cause the ink to run. The paper would absorb the water differently than authentic notes, but the ink would not run.

Case in point: laser-printed fakes.

Might the observed effects have resulted from the note having gone through the laundry?  That would account for its worn appearance, and the detergent might possibly have messed up whatever the ultraviolet agent is, and partially removed the gold maple leaves.  If the supposedly intaglio portions are indeed raised, I doubt very much if it's a counterfeit.

After having had a chance to personally examine the note in question, I do believe that Bob has nailed this one right away. I agree completely with his sight-unseen assessment of the note. It does exhibit all the traits that one might expect from having been through the laundry. The detergent seems to have affected the surfaces of the note that were not protected by the lacquer on the back, hence the dark snowflakes and overall bright white glow. Also, the simple act of having gone through the laundry accounts for the overall poor condition of the note, the reduced but still present raised ink and gold leaves, and the absent blue UV overprint.

I have returned the note to its rightful owner, as it is -- in my personal opinion -- a genuine, albeit laundered, banknote.

I'm new to this forum and decided to check out all the topics.  I'm especially interested in counterfeit.  I work at a bank and everyone there knows to come to me if they suspect a fake.  I can tell just by looking at it.  The first thing I look at is the eyes of the person on the bill.  Do the tiny circles that make up their eyes look like circles or are they smudged together?  The smudged ones are fake!  In our small community and in our one bank, we have had numerous fake $20s, $50s, $100s and I spotted a $5 Journey Series this summer.  They're easy to spot as far as I'm concerned.