There are some general indications applying to all stamps which may cause suspicion :-
a) A new perfin design appearing which has not been reported earlier must be considered with caution.
New designs are discovered from time to time, but Romanian Perfins have been listed for around 50 years and
any new design must be investigated carefully.
Most bogus examples seem to have originated in the last 10 years.
None of the suspected bogus perfin designs have appeared together with genuine perfins in general lots,
but this will happen as the bogus items get into general circulation.
b) Bogus perfins will be usually found on low value of worthless stamps, as the application of the perfin
will in most cases lower the value of the stamp.
Applying a bogus perfin may raise the value of a worthless example and make it marketable.
c) Many bogus perfins appear in blocks and these, too, must be suspect. Genuine blocks of perfins do exist but are rare.
The method used for perfining must be considered. It is common for users to fold sheets before perforating,
but consider the way they are folded. A genuine user will obtain and fold a whole sheet, perhaps first tearing it into
manageable blocks. However, a number of suspected bogus perfins exist were the sheet was split into blocks of four
and then folded horizontally and vertically before perfinning. This action can be identified by inspection of the inspection
of off centre perfins and the folds in the block’s perforations.
See Figures 1 & 2 (in Type A Section below).
A particularly notable example of this is to be seen in Figure 5 (in the Type B section below).
In this case a block of 35 mint examples has been concertinaed horizontally and them perfinned very accurately
with multiple strikes of a bogus die or even with a bogus line of dies. In this case the design on the perfin and the
size of the block identify it as a probable bogus example
d) If any of the perfin holes are blind, in the case of bogus perfins inspection of the plug may indicate that it originates
from issue different to the one perfinned. However, this can occur in genuine cases where two sheets of stamps of
different denominations were perfinned together.
e) Where a bogus perfin is purporting to be a genuine perfin its design should be carefully checked against the
catalogue illustration. Paper distortion, or slight variations in multiple dies may account for a slight difference
but any significant variation must be suspect. In practically all cases a Romanian perfin stamp is less valuable
than an unperforated one, when the perfin is genuine so this form of faking is unlikely to occur.
Bogus Perfins on used examples
When the stamps are in used condition careful examination under magnification will usually identify bogus Perfins
which were applied after the stamp was removed from the envelope.
a) When the perfin was applied prior to affixing the stamp the back of the stamp will be smooth when removed from the paper, but Perfins applied after removal will have small distortions around the edges of the perforation.
b) Stamps with postmarks showing they were used in a number of cities must also be suspect. Some Perfins were used in a number of different cities, but most were used in Bucharest and few were used in more than two cities
c) Where a postmark falls across a perfin hole the ink of the postmark should be found inside the hole on its edges. Where the perfin is on cover the ink of the postmark should be seen on the paper visible inside the perfin. Where the stamp has been removed for applying the bogus perfin and reapplied the paper visable inside the hole will be clean.
d) Inspection of the inside edges of a bogus perfin may show them to be cleaner than the stamp perforations
Bogus Perfins on mint examples
When bogus Perfins are applied to mint stamps they are difficult to identify as bogus, except by the indications common to all stamps, but there are some indication to look out for
a) Any perfin on a mint stamp must be suspect. Mint perfinned stamps should not generally have been released to the public. However, stamps belonging to companies which had ceased trading may well end up in the hands of the public.
b) The perforating of a mint stamp will remove its value and hence bogus Perfins will only be found on stamps with low catalogue value.
Listing of Suspected Bogus Perfins
The design of a perfin may be an indication of its bogus status. Three separate classes of bogus Perfins have been identified, Single Hole Perfins, Square Grid Perfins, Special Designs. These are given the designations A, B & C and are discussed below
Type A - Single Hole
‘Perfins’
The simplest way to produce a bogus perfin is to use a simple single hole punch. This will result in a ‘perfin’ which may not be recognised as such by many collectors as it does not constitute ‘perforated initials’, nor does it identify the owner. In some instances filing hole will fall on the stamp producing an inadvertent single hole ‘perfin’.
Here is such an example on a block of SG1432, the 1940 Aviation Fund issue. It is clearly not a filing hole and may be a deliberate attempt to deceive. (See Figure 2)
Figure 2
Type B -
Square Grid Perfins
At least fours sources of these bogus perfins have been identified, but they all seem to have been acquired recently from one Romanian dealer, although it is not clear where they were originally produced.
These all appear to have been produced on a perfin machine with a square grid of removable pins. There are no known genuine Romanian Perfins produced by a machine of this design. These are known in many designs, and these are indicated in the listing below.
From observation of the bogus designs the authors of Ref 1 have suggested that they all have been produced using a machine equipped with a 10 x 10 grid of removable pins (see Figure 3). Any perfin which corresponds with the pins on this grid must be considered as suspect. However, some of the three letter examples illustrated below appear to be 11 pins wide, and the tallest known example is only 9 pins high
Figure 3 -
The suggested layout of the square grid
Many of these are in postmarked blocks of four, which in itself is suspicious. There are similar examples in mint blocks of four. Below, as Figure 4, are examples of Type B
Figure 4
Figure 5
The example of Type B shown below as Figure 6 has an
identifiable date on its postmark, which is in 1941, but the stamp itself was
not issued until 1947. Consequently
the post mark as well as the perfin is bogus, which brings into doubt all other
examples with similar postmarks.
Figure 6
Type C – Special
Designs
It is difficult, and costly to manufacture a pefinning
machine so it is unusual to see special designs as fakes.
However, a perfining machine, possibly one of a number of such machine
existed in the hands of a producer of bogus
perfins. This machine is capable of stamping a more complex design.
One of these machine was purchased in
Figure 7
A number of Perfins with the design incorporating this shaped
‘S’ are known on the Postal tax issue SG T1589-1595 in mint blocks of four and
are shown below as Figure 8
An identical perfin is known on a mint pair of SG 1692, the
1935 issue commemorating the centenary of the birth of Carlos 1
shown
below as Figure 9
Figure 9
Listing of Suspected Bogus Perfins