APS Expertizing Service Errors?

Interesting thoughts Clark. But maybe a clarification is needed. Are you referring solely to older US, or are you more broad based? It might also be useful if you could elaborate on the bad certs that you've seen, and why you've thought they weren't good. Did you get any of them re-reviewed by a different committee?

I thought that the PF, and maybe APEX, have certs contained in searchable data bases.

Steve,

Certs from one expertizing committee are overturned by another committee from time to time. The worst example I recall was a PF certificate for a never hinged 388 line pair overturned by PSE. The owner, a dealer, showed me the pair for third opinion. Unfortunately for him, the pair had obviously fake perforations added to an imperf coil line pair, likely from an A plate. I recall a PSE certificate for a 152 that was a 163 with ribbed paper. Unlike other printings of 163, the fine lines of the design are clearer on the ribbed paper printing, but the color is deeper and less brilliant than 152, more like some 189 shades, assuming the prominent vertical ribbing is missed. I currently have an APEX cert for a 3 cent Scott 65 with "laid paper" under review after it was overturned by the PF. The cert comments suggest that one reviewer did like the stamp because the "laid lines" are not the same spacing as those observed on the 1 cent Scott 61. Sometimes the same reviewers will see the stamp no matter which expertizing committee receives it. The expertizing community is surprisingly small.

It is difficult to see how consistent certificates could be issued for stamps for which there is no standard, especially for paper varieties that should not exist or for which the explanation contradicts the conventional description. For example, fibers in US "silk" paper are linen or cotton and many dealers and collectors are baffled by the descriptions in the Scott catalog. Few seem to understand that Continental silk paper has numerous fibers unlike revenue "experimental" silk paper with maybe only one or two fibers per stamp. Lack of basic information has resulted in collectors or dealers to misclassify bank note era stamps with one or two fibers as Continental silk paper.

In the reference collection is a 157 with ribbed paper with three certificates, one as a 146 with ribbed paper (not possible), one as a 157 with ribbed paper and a third as a 157. Another case I recall was a US Scott number 1 certified as unused by the PF and later used with a removed pen cancel by APEX. The worst cases have been well documented examples of covers declared to be fake and then only later found to be genuine. Still, it takes a long time to rehabilitate the reputation of a marquee item wrongly declared to be fake.

Most PSE certificates are on the Internet but searchable only by the certificate number. PSAG certificates do not appear to be available on-line.

The bottom line is that collectors should enhance their observation skills with understanding gained by studying available literature. It is helpful to be able to form an opinion about a stamp and understand relevant characteristics that determine whether a stamp will be called genuine or fake. I once found a used 4 cent perf 12 vertical line pair in a discard (fake) pile from another dealer. I was able to verify that it was genuine, send it in for certificate and sell the pair at the market price.

Clark

Thanks Clark, for your added thoughts. It does appear you're into the classic US (through the 1920s). My main interest is Portuguese colonies and slowly getting into Mexico. Both areas present interesting "problems."

But the lead line of your final paragraph should be required reading for all serious collectors of whatever: "The bottom line is that collectors should enhance......"

When and how does one determine when to send a stamp for certification? I inquired on this subject on another thread but was really not the correct place to ask the question. I have a respectable number of Italy, Iran, Bulgaria etc. that I have done the best possible personally to verify genuine vs. forgery through Serrane guide, APS library and internet searches. A large part of what is in question was procured (not by me) through reliable dealers. It now looks like even if I spend 30% of Scott for certification it may not be accurate.

You need to know which experts to trust for your particular collecting area.

There are examples where 'experts' have issued wrong opinions outside their field of expertise.

The main issue is those organisations which don't tell which expert have issued the opinion in the first place.
Again, there are examples where an expert have passed away, but the organisation kept issuing certificates for that collecting area...

I actually would like to see a service where someone would review pics of ebay lots and render a basic opinion (low risk, medium risk, risky, etc) for a small fee. I am not going to master all aspects of expertizing (no reference collection, etc.)

No guarantees etc but just a second opinion.

I've found this forum to be great for second,third and forth opinions for something on ebay..

Alub, I agree with the tremendous value of this forum. However it just does not seem proper to expect the participants to offer opinions on dozens of stamps for me. It is for certain that many of the participants are dealers and experts who make some of their living performing this service. I just cannot come to grips with spending thousands only to find a bunch of forgeries. I like Angore's idea of a small charge with no guarantee. Any takers, ideas?

I do not know how the expert services run their businesses, with regard to quality control. If I were running such a service, I would definitely carefully track certs that are overturned, by timeframe, stamp issue, expertiser(s), and so on. As this data aggregates, one could draw potentially significant conclusions about where there are problem areas -
a) with particular expertisers
b) with particular stamp issues that are hard to expertise
c) possibly note periods of time where things collectively weren't getting done as well as they should be -- and understand why

Specific corrective action can sometimes be taken for things like this, when one has specific data such as the above. Maybe they already do this - I don't know.

Speaking specifically to my own experience(s) with incorrect certificates - I will say that I've seen incorrect certs from all services. Everyone does make a mistake - I fully get that. There are areas which are extremely hard to expertise. Also, bonehead mistakes do happen.

I like some of the proposed ideas about expert-group transparency. I'll add to that and say, maybe along with publishing error rates, collective information on how many opinions are rendered for a given country/stamp/issue would be valuable, with error rate broken down by each. Different expert groups have different core competencies, and in picking one, it would be useful if a submitter had better access to know what group is really good at what.

Everyone makes mistakes... But here's a doozy:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/US-Good-Cov...AOSw44BYXrkx

I'll give you guys a few days to see if anyone else sees what I see.

I am not a postal history guy so I am not sure what the rate was supposed to be. What I see is a missing stamp and a stamp that may have moved at some point while in transit but was technically not "removed and replaced out of alignment", at least in the sense of it being a defect or alteration. The #35 is tied by the German marking.

There are two postal marks on the stamp, one does not tie it to letter?

Is it a U5?

It looks like there was another commemorative stamp over the embossed stamp. The numbers 886 were erased, kinda (you can still see part of it). That may have indicated the postal cost of 22c. The missing stamp covered the number. The black cancel on the stamp does not fit with the cover. It looks like the address writing was interrupted under the stamp. Almost like part of the writing was on the original stamp. Very interesting and fun exercise.