Apparently there is no longer enough profit in counterfeiting regular
$100 bills. After all why settle for passing a fake at only face
value, when if it is an error note you can get substantially more?
That seems to be the latest news from Peru, where Lima is such a
hotbed of fraudulent activity that the U.S. Secret Service has an
office there. Now, criminals are also deliberately counterfeiting errors.
Connect with Coin World:
up for our free eNewsletter
Like us on
us on Twitter
U.S. dealers have been offered Series 2009A $100 Federal Reserve
notes out of Lima with mismatched serial numbers; if genuine, they
would be the most spectacular mismatches in history. Most genuine
errors of the type usually have one or two mismatched digits and occur
either when a numbering machine sticks or when the operator makes a
mistake during setup. What sets these apart is a degree of brazenness
that error export Fred Bart, author of United States Paper Money
Errors, says “results in errors that are virtually impossible.”
The notes being peddled as authentic errors were said to be
confirmed as authentic by a local Peruvian bank, and all seven or
eight digits and the suffix letters are mismatched. But it doesn’t
stop there. The Federal Reserve districts also do not match. One such
note has a serial number for Chicago at the top left and New York at
the bottom right. Another has Atlanta and New York in those positions.
What also makes the notes suspect, Bart says, is that the plate
position numbers on all the notes are different when you would expect
them to be the same.
The charm of the Morgan dollar, plus a look at
the largest U.S. gold coin to circulate:
Another column in the July 3 Coin World takes a look at the
whimsical names of the $2 Federal Reserve note
The six serial numbers on the three notes reported to Coin
World are inconsistent with Bureau of Engraving and Printing
reports. On the first note mentioned above, the Chicago serial number
dates to December 2011 and the New York one to January 2013. On the
second, the Atlanta number is from February 2014 and New York’s from
April 2015. A third example had both numbers from the Atlanta
district, but one was from August 2013 with an F suffix and the other
from December 2013 with a H at the end of the number.