|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Don't be Scared to send it back!!
To all the newer collectors on the Forum I would offer this advice! If you are not happy with whatever a seller sends you then send it back! Just because you bought an item from a reputable source does not mean that you should be affraid to question the authenticity! I bought a Victorian Royal Irish Rifles Glengarry badge (KK 689) from a prominent dealer, on receipt I was less than happy with the "Thing" that dropped onto my doormat. I requested a refund and was told that the badge was 100% genuine and was purchase from Hugh King, even though it looked more like something from Burger King!
£100 pounds for a repro is OTT in my opinion, see below images of two badges, the blackened badge with the rust on the back (Gilding Metal does not rust!!) was the one sent to me by the dealer and returned in protest and at a financial loss to me, the other badge is a 100% genuine badge procured from one of the newer sellers/dealers (Endici) who are increasingly providing an outstanding service. K&K does not help that much because some of it's black and white images do not provide a great deal of definition, although the books themselves are a fantastic reference. Look at the two badges, although one has lost it's orginal black finish remnants can be seen between the detail of the lettering etc. Look at the scrolling to the Maidens legs, the jewels to the headband of the crown and the overall depth of a genuine badge. Although polished this IMO is a 100% GENUINE badge. The point of my message is, this Forum is a fantastic site for collectors, do not be bullied by established outlets, get a second opinion and don't be affraid to question a dubious item! Andy Last edited by 2747andy; 09-10-15 at 10:52 PM. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hi, I know I'm relatively new to the forum but having had a close look at the badges you put on there as repro & original, I like the blackened gilded metal one; the patina looks OK to me & the blackening on the back will go that colour with age. It's not rust. I would definitely have that one in preference to the one that's had all the blackening removed or was never there in the first place. I think that it's down to individual opinions of what is re-strike or original. I have been collecting over 35 yrs & dealt with all the top dealers in my time & I think I have a good working knowledge of badges.
The upshot of all this is, what one person says is reproduction another person may say is real. Freya 1940 Mod comment - Please note that this member is the seller of the badge in post one so has avested interest and his opinion is not impartial. Last edited by Alan O; 16-01-15 at 09:39 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
If you straighten up the second picture, then the lugs appear to be 'fixed' at least 10 degrees to the horizontal; outside of manufacturing tolerance to my mind.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Or what you see is where one has bent slightly up and one slightly down of course.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Both badges appear to have a higher left lug and the right is lower, perhaps as Alan says, due to them being bent ???
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
thank you for your valued reply! The first badge is definately a reproduction and the "Rust" to the rear although not real rust has been applied to the rear of the badge to give the effect of age, a quick rub with a cotton bud showed that it had not been there very long. What cannot be shown in a photograph is weight, however the badge you like is lightweight and "Tinny" whereas the other is solid and well struck, as you would expect an item from the Victorian era to be! As to "what one person says is reproduction another person may say is real". I have been fortunate to have been able examine both badges, I do not want to sound a Big Head, but when I give my opinion that an item is reproduction I am usually "Spot On" as, in my honest opinion I am in this case! Anyone wishing to sell such a badge for £100 is obviously going to say it is real, it is just a matter of who believes them! Thank you once again. Andy Last edited by 2747andy; 27-07-15 at 07:27 PM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Send it back
Hi Andy, I think it is very good to return the fakes to the seller. It is one way to help this thing stop. If they get the stuff returned to them all the time and everybody demands there money back, it will hurt them. I recently returned a packet of badges to a seller who swore high and low that they were original, but they were not. He did eventually pay me back my money including postage. I believe he does not have a good reputation for dealing in originals. But, even "good" dealers make mistakes. By returning the bad items, even these guys will be more careful when buying in collections. They will weed out the fakes. Have a grand day and may this be a year where fakes are stopped. Regards Andrew
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
It is the face that is a give away. It looks like a bloke on the first one. I always look carefully at faces, badges such as the Norfolks have some really nasty crones on the restrikes.
At the end on the day, if you are not satisfied, it goes back. Matti |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
I am with Andy on this one. The fake RIR glengarries have been around for years and years, I think it's in one edition of Wilkinson witht he price guide states 'if genuine' or something like that. For that reason it's a badge I would be happy to pay decent money for from a trusted dealer and that hasn't happened here.
The new 'good' one has at least come via a third party from Bosleys so there is insurance that is genuine although as we are seeing issues raised on here that they make mistakes from time to time - maybe not so much on fake v genuine matters but more so on non-authorised examples. I've never had a bad badge from them. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
if you think about how many badges dealers and auction houses turn over
every year you are bound to get some restrike - fake badges that manage to slip through the net. however if you have paid good money for a badge that turns out to be a fake - restrike , then yes send it back for a refund you are within your rights to do this paj1 |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I think a distinction needs to be made between sales at auction and other sales especially those where a money back guarantee is offered.
In bidding at an auction you are entering into a contract on the fall of the hammer and as has already been mentioned before, returning auction items will be subject to terms and conditions you are deemed to have accepted in making your bid even if you have not read the small print in the catalogue or the small print which is usually on a sign displayed in the auction room. Not for nothing does the term Caveat Emptor apply !!!! P.B.
__________________
Interested in all aspects of militaria/military history but especially insignia and history of non regular units with a Liverpool connection Members welcome in my private Facebook group “The Kings Liverpool Regiment ( 1685-1958 )” |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Guys,
I'd go one further with all this. If you are unsatisfied with what you have bought for any reason whatsoever then you should send it back - simple as that really. Regards Chris |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Depends if the auction house describes the lot being sold correctly - if they do not and say sell a cast zink 5th/6th Territorial Battalion, The Staffordshire Regiment as an anodised item then I would expect a full refund including all postage and fees. Regards Chris |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Its going to be a bit of a gamble if you are bidding on items that you only
see a picture of in a catalogue and then maybe only a front view of badge paj1 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the original post, here are some better images of the badge in question. I have had the fortunate position of being able to handle both and this one is IMO, 100% Genuine, the other, which was "Returned to Sender" was nowhere near this quality. My dilema now is do I take up Dave the MBA's offer to return it to it's original black finish or leave it as it is, it would be a shame to cover such a fantastic patina.. Hey Ho.. I now have a genuine example so I may just leave her as she is, she appears to have been in this undressed state for some time, perhaps "deblackened" by the original wearer over 108 years ago?
Andy |
|
|