Ebay Item # 2910583236 is an interesting example of an APEX Certificate that is completely erroneous. Here is the description for this lot:
The APS Certificate reads: "Germany - local issue, Michel No. V2III, unused, no gum, genuine, pin hole."
![]() |
![]() |
The certificate number isn't legible, but it was issued on Aug. 13, 1997 (at a time when Dr. Bohne was still expertizing German locals for APEX, even though he was ill and would die the following year).
A more correct description of the lot would be:
"Germany - COD label soaked from a cover, worthless". I communicated my opinion on this to Mercer Bristow and Robert Lamb on Feb. 7, 2003.
The listing for this issue in Michel (2008 edition) is as follows:
<><><><><>
1945, end of July. Triangular COD label used as fee paid label. Three various types, amount of fee entered by hand in red or blue ink; "Nachnahme" crossed out; shorthand handstamp in various positions; line perf. 11½ (Type A I and II) or imperf. (Type I).
| Type A I: |
"Nachnahme" in Antiqua typeface, above that the amount of the fee and below that the word "Remboursement", line perf. 11½ |
| Type I: |
"Nachnahme" in Fraktur typeface, amount of the fee in one or two of the lower corners, with "Remboursement", imperf. |
| Type II: |
"Nachnahme" in Fraktur typeface, above that the amount of the fee, without "Remboursement", line perf. 11½ |
| mint | used | cover | |||
| V 2 | 15 (Pf) | black on brownish red | |||
| A I | Type A I, perf. 11½ | 350, | 300, | 600, | |
| I | Type I, imperforate | 400, | 350, | 700, | |
| II | Type II, perf. 11½ | 350, | 300, | 600, |
Varieties
| V 2 III |
Figure of value missing (Type A I and I) |
600, | 500, | 750, |
| V 2 IV |
"Nachnahme" in Antiqua typeface, not crossed-out, red figure of value in lower left corner, imperf. |
750, | 750, | |
| V 2 V |
Like V 2 IV, however "Nachnahme: in Fraktur typeface |
850, | 850, | |
| V 2 VI | Like V 2 V, however two figures of value in red | , | , | |
| V 2 I/III |
Pair, one stamp without figure of value, "Nachnahme" not crossed out |
1200, |
Michel numbers V 2 IV - VI are postally-valid reprints produced in the Nov. 1945 to Jan. 1946 timeframe for dealers and collectors.
<><><><><>
|
OK, let's look at the stamp in question. The scan isn't very good. Here's the best I could do with it: |
For comparison, here's a genuine copy of Michel V 2 AI (to see a cover, click here). The line through "Nachnahme" and the shorthand stamp are present, although faint. |
|
|
|
Allegedly, this is Michel V 2 III. Therefore, the following should be true, per the Michel description:
1. Should be type I (imperf.) - nope, this is Type II (which only exists perf.).
2. "Nachnahme" should be crossed out - doesn't appear to be.
3. Validating shorthand handstamp should be present - doesn't appear to be.
Three strikes and you're out!
For those not familiar with the shorthand handstamp, here's the story.
Every Grossraschen provisional stamp was "validated" by a (usually) purple handstamp of unintelligible squiggles. Actually, the squiggles are German shorthand and translate to "Correspondence in German shorthand desired". (See the 46th Congress Book (1980), pages 38-39, for more information.) Here's a scan that clearly shows the shorthand stamp near the bottom (Michel V31, the crossed hammers are drawn by hand rather than handstamped):

Oh yeah, the alleged V 2 III should either have gum or a cancellation. This example has neither. Not exactly damning, except that it suggests how this "stamp" was produced:
Now, how difficult would it be to soak the Nachnahme label off of this cover and submit it for expertizing as V 2 III like the above non-existant imperforate Type II:

Or this one, which really does exist without figures of value (V 2 III/Type I). It would not be terribly difficult to cross out "Nachnahme". The shorthand stamp might be a bit harder to fake. But who knows, maybe the expertizer won't care.

Now, who can tell me what's really interesting about this cover?
<><><><><>
© Jay T. Carrigan, 2003-2009